








:^'.v.-^r 



.f~- •i<t- -f 



..--u!;... ' ;-'!." ' !. 



m 







'^//^/// 







r ^y ^ri" i i il |lll l ll i """i;;" i , , ' i m-.| | <iihih,| | !■ ■ "i|.Ni mi wil l I , 1 .. J i | i .m,ij, /,,,.iii I ., ^ I ji ! I l l ,..," i i | .in i f II L I ^.jt M . F - . 



NOTES, 



CEITICAL AND PRACTICAL, 



ON THE BOOK OF 



LEVITICUS: 



DESIGNED AS A GENERAL HELP TO 



BIBLICAL READING AND INSTRUCTION 



By GEORGE BUSH, ^ 

PROF. OF HEB. AND ORIENT. LIT. N. Y. CITY UNIVERSITY. 



j^J^.©^. c^^i^y^^i^c^^ 



1% 



NEW-YORK: 
DAYTON & NEWMAN, 

199 BROADWAY. 

1843. 






Entered according to act of Congress, 
In the year one thousand eight hundred and forty-two, by 

GEORGE BUSH, 

In the clerk's office of the District Court of the Southern District of New- York. 



S. W. BENEDICT, STEREOTYPER AND PRINTER, 

No. 128 Fulton Street, N. Y. 






INTRODUCTION. 



^<^ 



§ 1. Title J Author i Date^ ^c. 



The Hebrews, according to their usual custom, denominate this, the third book 
in the order of the Pentateuch, 5^'lp'^l va-yikraj and he called j from its initial 
word. By the Septuagint it is called Acvltikovj leuitikon (levitikon) ^ of which 
the Vulgate title * Leviticus ' is the Latinized form ; and this has been retained 
by our own and all the modern versions. It is so called from the fact that it 
treats principally of the rites and ceremonies, the services and sacrifices, of the 
religion of the Israelites, the charge of which was committed to the Levitical 
priesthood, that is, to Aaron and his sons, or descendants, who were of the tribe 
of Levi J and who alone of that tribe exercised the priestly office. It is not, 
therefore, the ministry of the Levites properly so called, who constituted a dis- 
tinct order from the priests, and subordinate to them, that forms the subject of 
this book, for of their services a much fuller account is contained in the book of 
Numbers than in the present. It is of the peculiar functions of the sacerdotal 
body usually termed ^ the sons of Aaron,' that the book, for the most part, treats, 
for which reason it is denominated by the Talmudists d^!3{lin tllin torath hak- 
kohanim^ the law of the priests^ and Dl^lQ^pn tl^in torath hakkorbanothj the law 
of the offerings. The ' sons of Aaron,' or the priests, were merely assisted in 
the performance of their sacred office by the descendants of the other branch of 
Levi's family, who obtained the privilege of officiating as a kind of second order 
of the priesthood, in recompense of the ready zeal which they displayed against 
idolatry and the worshippers of the golden calf. 

That Moses was the real author of this book, is proved, not only by the gen- 
eral arguments which demonstrate him to have written the whole Pentateuch, 
but by particular passages in other portions of the Scriptures where it is expressly 
cited as his inspired work. Thus, Nehem. 8. 14, ^ And they found written in the 
law which the Lord had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should 
dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month.' This ordinance is contained 
Lev. 23. 34, 42. Again it is said of the mother of Jesus, Luke 2. 22, that ^ When 
the days of her purification according to the law of Moses, were accomplished, 
they brought him to Jerusalem,' a law which is to be found Lev. 12. 6. Once 
more, it is said 2 Chron. 30. 16, of the priests and Levites, that ' they stood in 
their place, after their manner, according to the law of Moses, the man of the 
Lord ; the priests sprinkled of the blood which they received of the hand of the 
Levites.' This regulation occurs Lev. 1. 5. The true authorship of the book is 
by these passages put beyond question. 

The time and place at which the book was written^ are determined by the 



IV INTRODUCTION. 

words occurring ch. 27. 34, ' These are the commandments which the Lord com- 
manded Moses for the children of Israel in Mount Sinai.^ That this is to be 
understood not only of those laws which were orally promulgated at that time 
and place, but of those also which were committed to writing, may be inferred 
from the parallel expression, Num. 36. 13, * These are the commandments and 
the judgments which the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses, unto the child- 
ren of Israel, in the plains of Moab, by Jordan, near Jericho.' As it was in the 
plains of Moab here mentioned that Moses died, and as the precepts in the book 
of Numbers could not have been written either prior or subsequent to the period 
of the sojourn at that station, it is reasonable to conclude, that if in one case 
mention is made of written laws, the same is to be understood in the other. So 
that there is no room to question that this book was written during the encamp- 
ment of Israel at the foot of Mount Sinai. This is strikingly confirmed by such 
allusions as the following, indicating that the state of the Israelites at the time, 
was that of an encampment, instead of a permanent settlement in cities and 
villages. Lev. 4. 12, < The whole bullock shall he carry forth without the camp? 
V. 28, < And afterward he shall come into the camp.^ Ch. 14, 33, ' And the Lord 
spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, When ye be come into the land of 
Canaan which I give to you,' &c. implying that they had not yet arrived there. 

§ 2. The Period embraced by the History. 
Archbishop Usher, who is followed by Mr. Home, supposes that the book 
comprises the history of the transactions of a single month, viz. from April 21 
to May 21, of the year 2514, which answers to the first month of the second year 
after the departure from Egypt. Others consider it as containing only the ac- 
count of what passed during the eight days of the consecration of Aaron and his 
sons. The former is the more generally received opinion, but as the book itself 
contains no definite data by which the chronological arrangement of its facts 
can be adjusted, we can affirm nothing positive on the subject. 

§ 3. Divisions J Contents , ^c. 
By the Jews this book is divided into ten D WIS parashoth, or larger divisions, 
and twenty-three t'^^ID siderim, or smaller divisions. These, in the arrange- 
ment of our Bibles, are comprised in twenty-seven chapters, of which the 
contents may be again subdivided and classified as follows : 

Part I. — Laws concerning Sacrifices* 

CHAPTERS 

I. Of the burnt-ofierings, ....1 

II. Of the meat-ofierings, -----.., 2 

III. Of the peace-offerings, ---- 3 

IV. Of the sin-off'erings, ------. ..4^ 5 

V. Of the trespass-offerings, ••.-... 0^7 

Part II. — Institution of the Priesthood, 

I. The consecration of Aaron and his sons, 8 

11. The offerings at the consecration of the priests, ... 9 

III. Death of Nadab and Abihu, 10 



IKTRODUCTIOK. 



Part III. — Distinction of Clean and Unclean Animals. 
I. Unclean beasts, birds, fishes, &c. specified. 



CHAPTERS 



11 



Part IV. — Laws concerning Purification. 

I. Of women after child-birth, 12 

II. Of persons infected with leprosy, 13,14 

III. Of persons having bad issues, 15 

Part V. — Various Regulations. 

I. Concerning the great day of atonement, - - - - - 16 

II. " the place of ofiering sacrifices, - - - - 17 

III. " things prohibited to be eaten, 17 

IV. " incestuous connexions, 18 

V. " idolatry and various other crimes, - - - 19-22 

Part VI. — Laws concerning the Festivals , Vows, and Tithes. 
I. The sabbath, passover, pentecost, feast of trumpets, day of atone- 
ment, and feast of tabernacles, 23 

II. Various ceremonial and judicial rites relative to sacred festivals, 24 

III. Law of the sabbatic year, year of jubilee, &c. .... 25 

IV. Prohibition of idolatry, &c. 26 

V. Of vows, things devoted, and tithes, 27 



§ 4. Argument, Scope, fyc. 

Although the book of Leviticus contains some matters purely historical, yet 
its leading scope is to record the laws concerning the sacrifices, ordinances, and 
institutions of that remarkable economy from which it derives its name. The 
established worship of the Hebrews was offering — not prayer, said or chanted, 
nor instrumental music, nor any like form of devotion — but the presenting to the 
Deity certain articles of food and drink. This system of worship is not to be 
understood as having originated at the time to which the book refers. As there 
were moral laws in the world by which human conduct was more or less governed 
prior to the delivery of the Decalogue from Mount Sinai, so it is evident from 
the history of Cain and Abel, of Noah, of Abraham, and other patriarchs, that 
sacrificial offerings are to be dated back to the earliest periods of which we have 
any account. They constituted the prevailing form in which the spirit of devo- 
tion was taught to express itself from the very infancy of the race. But as sac- 
rifices were ordained to enter largely into the dispensation now about to be estab- 
lished, they are in this book instituted, as it were, anew, placed upon their true 
foundation, and commanded with circumstances which gave them gi-eater im- 
portance, and served to illustrate their typical character with more effect. 

The sacrifices prescribed in the Levitical worship, were of two kinds j the 
bloody and the unbloody ; or the animal and the vegetable offerings ; the latter 
consisting o{ fruits and libations. 

(I.) The Bloody Sacrifices. — These consisted, (1.) of Holocausts, which 
were offered to the Lord entire, and were considered as ranking highest in dig- 
1* 



Vi INTRODUCTION, 

nity and excellence, for which reason Moses commences the law of sacrifices wilh 
them. (2.) Sin and Trespass-offerings, distinguished from the holocausts by- 
certain parts only of the animal being burnt on the altar, while the flesh was 
eaten by the priests. (3.) Eucharistical Sacrifices, or Thank-offerings. la 
these the fat only was consumed on the altar, a small portion being allotted by 
law to the priest, and all the rest being eaten at a solemn and joyful feast by the 
oflferer and his guests. 

(II.) Unbloody Sacrifices, or Meat-offerings. — These consisted of flour, 
bread, cakes, and ears of corn and grain roasted, of which a full account is given 
in ch. 2. The libations were of wine, and although the mode of pouring them 
out is nowhere described, yet it is most likely that the wine was poured out of 
some vessel upon the top of the altar. 

That these sacrifices had all of them a typical intent ; that they were * sha- 
dows of good things to come,' pointing more or less distinctly to ^ the body which 
is of Christ,' the whole epistle to the Hebrews is a continued proof. The impo- 
sition of hands upon the head of the victim, the shedding of its blood, and the 
consumption of its members upon the altar, were prefigurative acts setting forth, 
by a kind of dramatic representation, the future ofiering of the ' Lamb of God 
slain from the foundation of the world.' The requisite qualities of these sacri- 
ficial victims were emblematical of Christ's immaculate character, and the law 
of their oblation was a practical hieroglyphic of the great gospel truth of the 
atonement. So also were the outward washings and purifications enjoined by the 
Mosaic law, designed to intimate the necessity of inward purity. Indeed, if 
these institutions be severed from their New Testament relations, we have no 
key to unlock the hidden meaning of the Pentateuch, and the whole ritual con- 
tained in it dwindles down to a burdensome round of unmeaning ceremonies. 
But when regarded in the light nov/ suggested, the whole service, like the veil 
on the face of Moses, conceals a spiritual radiance under an outward coverings 
and the wisdom of the various appointments appears at once worthy of its di- 
vine Author. To what extent the spiritual import of these rites was actually 
understood by the Jews themselves, it may not be easy to determine j but that 
something, over and above the simple act of slaying and offering the animal 
victim, was required by the spirit of the law is evident from the fact, that the 
obedience of the chosen people is frequently represented as faulty, notwith- 
standing their scrupulous observance of the outward rite. Thus Isai. 1. 11, 12, 
* To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord : 
I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts ; and I delight 
not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.' 

But while the Jews probably in great measure fell short of apprehending the 
true typical genius of their own dispensation, and consequently rejected its 
divine FulfiUer when he came, an error is often committed on the other hand, in 
modern times, by the attempt to elicit more from these figurative institutions 
than they were intended to convey. It by no means follows that because cer- 
tain portions of the Levitical economy have a typical purport, we have therefore 
a right to give loose to imagination and multiply types at will, as if the Scrip- 
tures meant all that they can be made to mean. This was the fault of many of 
the earlier interpreters, who so abounded in mystical senses as to convert nearly 
the whole system into a mass of fancied allegories and typical allusions, which 



INTRODUCTION. 



vii 



Luther very properly characterized as the ^ froth of scripture.' To such lengths 

was this style of interpretation carried by Origen, Hesychius, and their disciples 
in later times, that one can scarcely open a volume of their commentaries with- 
out reading in the title-page that the ' mystical sense is duly expounded -,' evi- 
dently implying that the duty of the commentator was by no means discharged 
by the accurate grammatical exegesis of the text ; but that he was bound in 
addition to penetrate beyond the surface of the letter, and enlighten his readers 
by an exhibition of the manifold occult meanings hidden beneath the surface, and 
constituting those abysmal depths of import, which the plummet of lexicogra- 
phy could never presume to sound. 

It may be difficult, indeed, to lay down precise rules which shall be universally 
applicable in the way of interpretation, but the grand canon undoubtedly is, to 
follow strictly the apostolical explanations, where w^e have them; and, where 
we have them not, to proceed with extreme caution, adhering rigidly to the 
analogy of faith, and standing as remote as possible from any thing which may 
appear fanciful, and give occasion to cavillers to discard typical expositions 
altogether. Under these restrictions we may safely recognize a typical import 
in many items of the Levitical law which are not expressly affirmed by the New 
Testament writers to be possessed of that character ; and, in fact, in no other 
way will that wondrous polity disclose to us the whole richness of its evangeli- 
cal implications. 

§ 5. Commentators, 

The remark made under this head in the introduction to the Notes on Exo- 
dus, holds strictly true of the book of Leviticus, viz. that it has been the subject 
of few commentaries except such as have at the same time embraced either the 
whole Pentateuch or the whole Bible. In pointing out therefore the sources of 
illustration for this portion of the Mosaic writings, I can do little more than 
recite the authorities already specified in my preceding volumes. They will be 
found enumerated at considerable length in the prolegomena to the work on 
Exodus, with critical estimates of the character and value of each. These it 
will be unnecessary to repeat at length in the present connexion, but it may sub- 
serve the convenience and. information of the reader, to be furnished with the 
titles of those works, from which he may hope to derive the most essential aid 
in the study of the scope and genius of the Levitical law. The following may 
be cited as claiming perhaps the first place in this relation : — 



Outram's Dissertations on the Jewish Sacri- 
fices. 

Lowman on the Hebrew Ritual, 

J. P. Smith on the Sacrifice and Priesthood 
of Christ. 

Faber on the Three Dispensations. 
" Horse Mosaicae. 

Willett's Hexapla on Leviticus. 

Pictorial Bible, 

Lightfoot's Works. 

Magee on the Atonement. 

Witsius' Miscellanea Sacra. 



Saurin's Dissertations. 

Michaelis' Comment, on Laws of Moses. 

Spencer de Legibus Hebrseorum. 

Graves on the Pentateuch. 

Warburton's Divine Legation. 

Davison on Sacrifices. 

Sykes on do. 

Bahr's Symbolik of the Mosaic Worship, 

(Germ.) 
Owen's Prelim. Dissert, on Epistle to the 

Hebrews. 
Aiasworth on the Pentateuch. 



Vm INTRODUCTION, 

To most of the above works I have had recourse in the preparation of the en* 
suing Notes, but to one of the number — The Pictorial Bible — I feel constrained 
on this, as on former occasions, to express my indebtedness in a more particular 
manner. The Notes of the Editor, Mr. Kilto, can scarcely be consulted on any 
point of which he treats without advantage, but it is more especially in the 
department of modern oriental manners and usages, that his work is so signally 
in advance of any other Biblical Commentary. From having himself spent sev- 
eral years as a traveler in the East, he has been enabled to make the existing 
institutions, laws, and customs of those ancient regions of the globe most happily 
tributary to the explanation of a multitude of passages which had never before the 
light of a satisfactory solution cast upon them. On all subjects of this nature, 
it will be perceived that I have drawn largely upon his pages, and so also 
in the natural history of the beasts, birds, and fishes mentioned in the 
eleventh chapter, in laying down the distinction between the clean and the un- 
clean. For a very large part of the annotations on that chapter, requiring a 
species of knowledge to which a mere critical or practical expositor can seldom 
be expected to lay claim, I have been indebted to the results of his accurate 
inquiries. Being conscious of the necessity, in this province of my work, of 
' entering into other men's labors,' I trust the reader, instead of objecting to my 
copious extracts, will rather be grateful that I have provided so liberally from 
this source for his information in a field of comment, into which he has probably 
often come ' seeking fruit, and finding none.' 

In reference to the work now oifered as a new korban on the altar of Biblical 
learning, a few words will be permitted. The book which I have here under- 
taken to illustrate on the plan of my previous volumes, constitutes a part of the 
sacred canon less read, and usually accounted less interesting and important, 
than almost any other. Although not omitted, of course, in any regular reading 
of the Scriptures entire from beginning to end, yet it is seldom returned to on 
any other occasion ; and in Bible-class and Sunday-school instruction is almost 
invariably passed by. May I be allowed to express the hope, that the present 
volume will be found, in no small measure, to have redeemed this book from the 
comparative disparagement which has fallen upon it ? If the ensuing notes 
shall have the effect of transferring to the reader, in any good degree, the feel- 
ings of intense interest which has pervaded the mind of the author in the prose- 
cution of his labors, the book will rise in his estimation with the perusal of every 
successive chapter, till at the close he shall acknowledge that revelation is rich 
even in its poorest parts, and that without the accurate knowledge of the Law 
which he here acquires, he never could so fully have understood the nature and 
value of the Gospel. 

No apology will be required by the thorough student of the Bible for the very 
frequent citation of the original in its appropriate type. The sentences are 
always translated, and I doubt not they will in many instances verify to the 
reader's mind the remark, which has so often occurred to my own, that a strictly 
literal rendering of a passage of Scripture is, in multitudes of cases, the very 
best commentary that can be ojBfercd upon it. The Hebrew is given without 
points, not from any slight esteem of the value of that appendage to the language, 
but simply in order to preserve the symmetry of the page by preventing the 
lines from being thrown unduly asunder. 



THE BOOK OF LEVITICUS. 



CHAPTER I. 

THE BURNT-OFFERING. 

In the system of Jewish sacrifices, 
the Burnt-offerings, treated of in this 
chapter, held the most conspicuous 
place. They were of all others the 
most ancient ; as the acceptable offer- 
ing of Abel was undoubtedly of this 
description, and the worship both of 
Noah and Abraham, long prior to the 
time of Moses, included them as an 
essential element. Indeed, the direc- 
tions concerning offerings in the chapter 
before us, are introduced in such a way 
as to indicate that the Lawgiver was 
not propounding a new form of worship, 
but regulating the ritual of one already 
understood and used : ^ When any man 
of you shall bring an offering to the 
Lord, ye shall bring your offering of the 
cattle, even of the herd and of the flock.' 
The earliest records of heathen anti- 
quity show, moreover, that such sacri- 
fices were in use among nearly all 
nations, and distinguished by accompa- 
nying rites and ceremonies very similar 
to those observed by the Hebrews, 
clearly indicating that they derived 
their origin from the same source, to wit, 
a divine institution ordained to the pa- 
rents of the race, and kept up among 
the antediluvians, from whom, through 
Noah and his family, it was transmitted 
to all subsequent generations of men, 
wherever dispersed over the earth. 

The original term for burnt-offering, 
ri^3> oldh, comes from the root, ^^2? 
dldhj to ascend. It is so called, be- 
cause it was laid whole on the altar, 
and then, with the exception of the skin, 
being consumed by fire, the greatest part 



of it ascended towards heaven. Its 
equivalents in other languages are as 
follows; Chal. ^Ti'$ altd, ascension; 
i'^JlD kelil, entireness ; ^"l^^O^ gemira^ 
oblation, Gr. hXaKapTTuaig, Kapircjfxa, b\c- 
KavTcoixa, all conveying the idea of a 
fire-offering wholly consumed, which 
is also clearly intimated by the Latin 
word ' holocaustum,' holocaust. The 
sacrifice consisted in the immolating of 
a male animal victim, which was some- 
times a bull of three years old, some- 
times a sheep or goat of one year old, 
and sometimes, but more rarely, a tur- 
tle-dove, or young pigeon. But from 
whatever class of the animal kingdom 
it were taken, whether from the herd or 
the flock, whether it were bullock, ram, 
or goat, one thing was indispensable — 
it was to be perfect in its kind, ' a male 
without blemish.' This rule was given 
to intimate to the people the reverence 
and respect with w^hich they should 
regard God, and every part of his ser- 
vice. It would be highly unbecoming 
to offer to him any thing that was lame, 
or blind, or diseased, or in any other 
way of little value. He will be served 
with every creature's best. But this 
was not all. The animal was to be the 
most excellent of its kind, in order the 
more fitly to shadow forth the excellen- 
cies of Him who was to be the great 
substance of this type, the Lamb slain 
from the foundation of the world, and 
who alone of all that ever partook of 
our nature was truly without sin. As 
he was to be a spotless Savior, so his 
representing type was to be a spotless 
victim. In addition to this it is to be 
observed, that the animal was to be se- 
lected from among those that were used 
for food, and were most eminently ser- 



10 



LEVITICUS. 



LB. C. 1490. 



viceable to man ; thus teaching him, 
that in serving God we are not to with- 
hold from him even that which is most 
near and dear to us, which goes to sus- 
tain our being and constitute our com- 
forts. As we received all from him, so 
we must render back all to him. Nor 
must we here fail to notice that peculiar 
feature of the law, by which the obla- 
tion was to be varied according to the 
ability of the offerer. While the rich 
man presented his bullock, the consider- 
ate and benignant spirit of the law made 
provision for the poor man also, who, 
as his circumstances would permit, 
might bring a lamb or a pigeon, with 
the assurance of its being equally ac- 
ceptable with the costlier gift of his 
neighbor. No one was to be discouraged 
from approaching God, by the consider- 
ation that he was not able to present to 
him such an offering as he could wish. 
He would have no m.an, however hum- 
ble, excluded from the pleasures and 
benefits, to say nothing of the duties, of 
such a religious observance. So legibly 
do we find the stamp of the divine bene- 
ficence impressed upon the smallest 
items of his institutions. 

The various ceremonies connected 
with the rite of the Burnt-offering, will 
be considered in detail, as we proceed 
in our annotations ; but we observe 
here, in regard to the occasions on which 
this species of offering was made, that 
they were both public and private. As 
their design was, in the mdiin, expiatory, 
they were presented, partly, in the name 
of the whole nation, daily, every morn- 
ing and evening, as also in connexion 
with a sin-offering on the great day of 
atonement, and on the three principal 
anniversary festivals ; — partly, on the 
solemnity of consecration to office — and 
partly by private persons, in order to 
be freed from the condition of Levitical 
uncleanness ; namely, by women after 
child-bearing, at the end of the legally 
prescribed period for the purification, — 
by lepers when cured^— by Nazarites, 



when they had touched a dead bod^^, — 
and by those referred to in Lev. 15. 
1-15. 

We say that the design of these 
offerings was mainly expiatory^ and 
such was undoubtedly the case. At 
the same lime, it is to be observed, that 
in the early ages of the world, when no 
other sacrifices were offered but whole 
burnt-offerings, this one kind of sacri- 
fice was also petitionary and eucha- 
ristic. and was in fact applied to every 
part of sacred worship, according to the 
circumstances and promptings of each 
individual. This is clearly deducible 
from the inspired history. Noah offered 
burnt-offerings as an expression of gra- 
titude to God for the preservation of 
himself and his family through the 
perils of the deluge. Job added burnt- 
offerings to prayers, when he interceded 
for forgiveness for his sons and his 
friends. Balaam, following, beyond 
doubt, the general custom, directed 
burnt-offerings to be prepared when he 
was about to pray for safety to Balak, 
and destruction to the Israelites. That 
burnt offerings used also to be presented 
as votive and voluntary oblations, may 
be inferred from the language of David, 
Ps. 63. 13-15, ' I will go into thine 
house with burnt-offerings ; I will pay 
thee my vows, which my lips have 
uttered, and my mouth hath spoken, 
when I was in trouble. I will offer unto 
thee hurnt-sacrifices of fallings, with 
the incense of rams j I will offer bul- 
locks with goats.' Ps. 61. 18, 19. ' Do 
good in thy good pleasure unto Zion j 
build thou the walls of Jerusalem. 
Then shalt thou be pleased with the 
sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt- 
offerings and whole burnt-offerings j 
then shall they offer bullocks upon 
thine altar.' In the former of these 
passages is doubtless to be understood 
votive offerings ; and in the latter, 
voluntary ones. 

And it is voluntary offerings, unques- 
tionably, which are contemplated in the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER I. 



11 



CHAPTER I. 

AND the Lorda called unto Mo- 
ses, and spake unto him^ out 

«^ Ex. 19, 3. 

chapter before us. The burnt-offering 
about which directions are here given, 
was not the public offering of the lamb, 
morning and evening, nor one pre- 
scribed to the Israelites at any appoint- 
ed time, or upon any particular occa- 
sion. It had respect to an offering to 
be brought by any individual, whenever 
he felt himself so disposed. It was 
ordered in view of those seasons in the 
pious Israelite's experience, when he 
felt his mind under more than ordinary 
impressions ; when he was sensible of 
his general sinfulness and deficiencies ; 
and when he would humbly seek mercy 
for those manifold offences and failings 
which are not particularly specified, 
and had no express offering appointed 
for them. 

As to the leading typical design of 
the Burnt-offering, nothing can be clear- 
er than that it had a special regard to 
the offering of Christ in a human body. 
It is so stated in the epistle to the He- 
brews ; ' When he cometh into the 
world he saith, sacrifice and offering thou 
wouldst not, but a body hast thou pre- 
pared me ; in burnt-offerings and sacri- 
fices for sin thou hast no pleasure. Then 
said I^ Lo, I come (in the volume of 
the book it is written of me), to do thy 
will, O God.' Here were the sins of a 
whole world to be atoned for ; here 
were innumerable transgressions of in- 
numerable persons, which needed mer- 
cy. The time was come when the 
cattle upon a thousand hills would be 
no longer accepted, but the offering of 
the Son of God was to supersede them 
all. He was to be slain, who alone 
could present an oblation worthy to be 
accepted as an expiation for the sins of 
untold millions of human beings. Such 
an offering he did present in the sacri- 
fice of himself on the cross, and the 



of the tabernacle of the congrega- 
tion, saying, 

b Ex. 40, 34, 35. Num. 12, 4, 5. 



intensity of his sufferings in undergoing 
that vicarious martyrdom is not inaptly 
denoted by the burning of the whole 
Burnt-offering which was so expressly 
enjoined. But without appearing to 
p7'ess the coincidences between the 
type and the antitype, when every thing 
is taken into consideration, we see not 
how a doubt can remain that the sacri- 
fice of the Burnt-offering was designed 
as a piacular substitute for the indivi- 
dual in w^hose behalf it was brought to 
the altar. With these remarks we are 
prepared to enter upon the explication 
of the text. 

1. And the Lord called unto Moses j 
and spake unto hiniy ^c. Heb. i^^jp^l 
vayikra, and he called. The word 
< Lord,' though inserted by our transla- 
tors in the first clause, occurs in the 
original only in the second ; — ' And he 
called unto Moses, and the Lord said/ 
&c. A similar construction occurs in 
Lev. 8. 15 : ' And he slew it, and 
Moses took the blood,' &c. — where it 
would seem, from the context, that it 
was Moses w^ho slew the sacrifice. 
Still the note on that passage will show 
that there is some degree of doubt as to 
the true construction. The Jerus. 
Targ. in this place renders, ' And the 
Word of the Lord called,' &c. As the 
cloud of glory now filled the tabernacle, 
and prevented all access to its interior, 
Moses stood without w^hile an audible 
voice from the mercy-seat addressed 
him in the words immediately follow- 
ing. The word ' called,' in the original, 
has the last letter written in smaller 
character than the rest, intimating, ac- 
cording to the Jews, that God now spake, 
not with a loud thundering voice, as 
upon Mount Sinai, but in lower and 
gentler tones, as befitted a milder and 
more permanent mode of communica- 



12 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



2 Speak unto the children of Is- 
rael, and say unto them,c If any 
man of you bring an offering unto 

c ch. 22, 18, 19. 

lion. IT Out of the tabernacle of the 

congregation. Heb. ^5^1^ ^n^^lO m'co- 
hel mo'edj more correctly rendered ta- 
hernacle of meeting^ or convention-tent j 
i. e., the tent or tabernacle where God 
and his people met at stated times. 
See Note on Ex. 27. 21, where it is 
shown that the term implies the meet- 
ing of two parties by previous appoint- 
ment. Gr. Ik rrj^ aKr]vy]g tov jxapTvpioVj 
from the tabernacle of the testimony. 
Compare Num. 11. 53, Acts 7. 14. 
By the phrase * out of the tabernacle,' is 
meant, out of the most holy place, from 
over the mercy-seat, and between the 
cherubim, where God was said pecu- 
liarly to reside. Hitherto he had spoken 
to Moses out of heaven, or out of the 
cloud 5 but having taken possession of 
the temple prepared for him, he makes 
that his audience-chamber, and gives 
his servant orders from thence. It 
does not appear that Moses was com- 
manded to come into the tabernacle, 
as the precluding glory probably now 
filled the sacred edifice, but we may 
suppose that he stood without, at or 
near the entrance, and there reverently 
listened to the uttered voice of Jehovah. 
2. If any man of you bring an offer- 
ing. Heb. p^p ti^^ :n^ip^ ^^ fin?!^ 

adam ki yakrib mikkem korban^ a man 
when he shall bring of you an offering. 
The original word here and elsev/here 
rendered ' offering,' is "p^p korbdn, de- 
rived from the verb ^"ip kdrab, signify- 
ing radically to approach, to draw near 
to, and in what is termed the Hiphil, or 
causative form, to cause to approach, 
to bring near, to present ; hence in the 
Hiphil, the verb is generally rendered 
in our version to offer, a sense of the 
term expressly confirmed by the fact 
that the original words for ' bring near,' 
and * offer,' are used interchangeably 



the Loud, ye shall bring your of- 
fering of the cattle, even of the 
herd, and of the flock. 



with each other in the following pas- 
sages :—l Chron. 16. 1, < And they 
offered ("lln'^'lp'^ yakribu,) burnt-sacri- 
fices and peace-offerings before God ;' 
for which 2 Sam. 6. 17 has, '■ And David 
offered (^'^'^ yaal,) burnt- offerings and 
peace-offerings before the Lord.' In 
accordance with this, the noun "p^p 
korban, Gr. ^wpov gift, is used to denote 
' an offering,' or that which wnsbrought 
to the altar, and dedicated to God, whe- 
ther it was a thing animate or inani- 
mate, a human being or a brute beast. 
(On the use of the word in the New 
Testament, Mark 7. 11, in reference to 
a practice condemned by our Savior, 
see Barnes' note, in loc.) Thus the 
bread or meat-offering, and the oblation 
of the first fruits. Lev. 2. 1-12, have the 
appellation ^ korban ' given them : 'And 
when any man will offer a meat-offer- 
ing (meal-offering,) unto the Lord, his 
offering {korban,) shall be of fine flour,* 
&c. So also the silver vessels, cattle, 
sheep, &c., offered by the princes. Num. 
7. 10-17, et inf are comprehended under 
the general name of * korban.^ Nay, 
the very wood which was used to burn 
the sacrifices on the altar, Nehem. 10. 
34, from its being brought for that pur- 
pose, is denominated ^ korban.^ And 
what is still more worthy of notice, the 
same phraseology is employed in refer- 
ence to the Levites as a consecrated 
body of men, from their being brought 
near and presented to the Lord for the 
service of the sanctuary : Num. 8. 10. 
' And thou shalt bring (tl^'lpn hikrab- 
ta,) the Levites before the Lord,' i. e. 
shalt offer them as holy persons dedi- 
cated to the service of Jehovah. As 
the verb m^lD kdrab, however, in its 
Hiphil form, denotes principally the 
bare act of bringing any thing to a par- 
ticular place or person, though rendered 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER I. 



IS 



3 If his offering he a burnt-sacri- 
fice of the herd, let him offer a 

d Exod. 12. 5. ch. 3. 1, and 22. 20, 21. 

by the word ^ offer,' it is to be observed, 
that when any private individual is said 
to * offer ' an animal or other oblation, 
it is to be understood simply of his 
hringmg it to the altar, not of his per- 
forming any part of the office which 
was exclusively appropriated to the 

Priests and Levites IT Ye shall bring 

your offering of the cattle, (even) of the 
herd and of the flock. The term ' cattle ' 
here is generic, including the ' herd ' 
and the * flock ' mentioned in connec- 
tion. The word ' even ' is therefore 
properly supplied in our version, to in- 
dicate that ' herd ' and ' flock ' are ex- 
egetical of ' cattle.' The Heb. term 
*]Jj<^ tzon, comprehends both sheep and 
goats, as is evident from v, 10. It ap- 
pears, therefore, that there were only 
five kinds of living creatures which were 
accepted in sacrifice, viz. of animals : 
beeves, sheep, and goats, including the 
young of each kind of eight days old. 
Lev. 22. 27 ; and of fowls i turtle-doves 
and young pigeons, 1. 44. These being 
of the most tame, gentle, and harmless 
species of creatures, the most easily ob- 
tained, as well as the most serviceable 
to man, were well adapted at once to 
point out the distinguishing moral attri- 
butes of Christ and his people, those 
' living sacrifices ' which were ' accept- 
able to God,' and also to intimate man's 
absolute dependance upon God for those 
blessings to which he owes his food and 
raiment, the crowning comforts of life. 
Besides, as some of the sacrifices were 
followed by a feast on the victim, which 
was esteemed a covenant rite, therefore 
such animals as were allowed for food, 
would naturally be required to be offer- 
ed in sacrifice. 

3. A burnt-sacrifice. Heb. tl^^ olah, 
more correctly rendered whole burnt- 
offering. The prescribed sacrificial 
offerings are distinguished in Hebrew 

2 



male ^without blemish: he shall 
offer it of his own voluntary will 

Deut. 15. 21. Mai. 1. 14. Epli. 5. 27. 
Heb. 9. 14. IPet. 1. 19. 



by two several terms, niIJi< isheh, and 
ni'3> olah, of which the first being a de- 
rivative fromL*i< ish,flre, denotes an of- 
fering by fire, and is applied both to of- 
ferings burnt wholly, Sind to those bui'nt 
in part. This word is generally ren- 
dered by ' offering by fire.' The word 
nji!" olah, on the other hand, literally 
signifying ' ascension,' from sl^'$ alahj 
to ascend, because these offerings went 
up in flame and smoke into the air, is 
applied to sacrifices wholly burntj 
which the Greeks denominated 6Xo>cau- 
Tcoixara holokautomata, or bXoKavarov ho- 
lokauston from which the word ' holo- 
caust' has been transferred into our lan- 
guage. If rendered in English phrase, 
it should properly be ' whole burnt- 
offering,' whereas by its being generally 
rendered by our translators ' burnt-of- 
fering,' the genuine distinction between 
the original words is hidden from the 
ordinary reader, as there is no differ- 
ence between the expression ^ burnt-of- 
fering,' and ' offering by fire.' But let 
the phrase ' whole burnt- offering' be 
employed, and the distinction is ob- 
vious. Every holocaust or ^ olah,' was 
an ' isheh,' or offering by fire, but 
every ^ isheh,' or fire offering, was not 
a holocaust. It m.ay here be remarked, 
that the ' whole burnt-offering' was the 
first or principal sacrifice with which 
God was daily served by his people, 
Num. 2S. 3, no part of it being eaten, 
but the whole consumed upon the altar. 
It pointed to the offering of the body 
of Christ, as is evident from Heb. 10. 
10. In Deut. 33, 10, it is rendered 
^ whole burnt sacrifice.' — IT A male 
without blemish. Heb. CiOlTl tdmim, 
perfect : i. e. having neither deformity, 
defect, nor superfluity of members, and 
free from distemper. Whence the pro- 
phet says, Mai. 1. 14, ' Cursed be the 
deceiver who hath in his flock a male, 



14 LEVITICUS. 

at the door of the tabernacle of 



[B. C. 1490. 



the congregation before the Lord. 



(i. e. a perfect male,) and voweth and 
sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt 
thing/ where ' corrupt' is opposed to 
* male.' This was a prefiguration of 
the perfect excellence of the sacrifice 
of Christ, who was ' a lamb without 
blemish and without spot.' 1 Pet. 1. 19. 
And not only so ; it was doubtless de- 
signed to intimate that we are to offer 
to God the best of all we have j the 
best of our time and strength, the vigor 
of our days, and the utmost of our ta- 
lents. Will he who would have no- 
thing but the best of Israel's herds and 
flocks, be pleased with such poor rem- 
nants of our time and thoughts as may 
be left from the service of the world ? 
Had the Jew brought an inferior beast. 
It would have been rejected by the priest, 
or the offering would have been void by 
law. Let us not suppose that the de- 
fectiveness of our spiritual oblations 
will be overlooked by him who searches 
the heart. What a man soweth, that 
shall he reap. Niggardly and unwilling 
gifts, weary and distasteful services, 
hasty and perturbed devotions, will 
find no more acceptance than the Is- 
raelite's blemished ox. — All the Burnt- 
offerings of beasts v/ere to be males, 
but this is not prescribed in regard to 
the fowls. — IT Of his own voluntary 
will. Heb. 15^1^1 lirtzonoj to his (i. e, 
God's) good pleasui'e, or favorable ac- 
ceptance. Thus the phrase is rendered 
by the Gr. 6cktov evavn K.vpLov, accepta- 
ble before the Lordj and the Lat. ' ad 
placandum sibi Dominum,' to render 
the Lord propitious to him, and thus 
by the Chaldee, ' that acceptableness 
may be to him before the Lord.' This 
sense is moreover confirmed by v. 4 
following, and by Lev. 23. 11, ' And he 
shall wave the sheaf before the Lord 
to be accepted for you, (D!Dil2^i lirtz- 
onekem),^ and by Jer. 6. 20, ' Your 
burnt-offerings are not acceptable 



4 eAnd he shall put his hand up- 

e ch. 4. 15. and 3. 2, 8. 13. and 8. 14, 22- 
and 16. 21. 



C^IS^i lerdtzon)? Rosenmuller adopts 
the same construction. At the same 
time, the sense given in our version 
does no positive violence to the origi- 
nal, and is supported by respectable 
names, but we think the other deci- 
dedly preferable. — ^ At the door of the 
tabernacle. Because here in the open 
space of the court the altar of Burnt- 
offerings was placed, upon which alone, 
even on pain of death, these oblations 
were to be made. Comp. Lev. 17. 3-7, 
The additional phrase, ' before the 
Lord,' has its usual import of before 
the Shekinah, the visible symbol of the 
divine presence. By thus bringing his 
offering to the place prescribed, the 
offerer acknowledged that the Lord 
dwelt there in a peculiar manner, and 
he moreover publicly, before all the 
people acknowledged himself a sinner, 
like unto his brethren, and needing mer- 
cy no less than the vilest of the human 
race. 

4. Shall put his hand upon the head, 
fyc. From Lev. 16. 21, it is probable 
that by ^ hand ' here is implied both the 
hands. The act denoted that the vic- 
tim offered was thereby wholly given 
over and devoted to God, being as it 
were henceforth solemnly manumitted 
from the possession of the offerer, who 
from this time ceased to claim any far- 
ther interest in it or control over it. It 
significantly intimated, moreover, the 
offerer's desire that his transgression 
might be put upon the animal thus pre- 
sented, and that the death to which he 
now devoted it, might be instead of 
that death which he had himself most 
justly deserved. The sinner who pre- 
sented the victim thus disburdened him- 
self of the sin he acknowledged before 
God, and laid the weight of it upon the 
sacrifice. It thus taught the grand gos- 
pel doctrine of substitution. IF It 

shall be accepted for him. Heb. ij 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER I. 



15 



on the head of the burat-oflferiDg ; I 5 And he shall kill the ^»bullock 
and it shall be ^accepted for him | before the Lord : iand the priests, 
gto make atonement for him. 

f ch. 22. 21, 27. Isai. 56, 7. Rom. 12. 1. 
Phil. 4. IS. » ch. 4. 20, 26, 31, 35, and 9. 1, 

nii'll] nirtzclh lo, from the same root 
with y\'2^ ratzon, above v. 3, and con- 
firming the interpretation there given. 

IT To make an atonement fo7' him. 

Heb. 1^53? "liT^ri lekapper dlauv. This 
was the great purport of the appoint- 
ment. In hope of this the worshipper 
brought his offering ; through it he 
sought pardon and reconciliation with 
God ; and when he offered it rightly, it 
became an atonement for him, not for 
any value of its own, but by virtue of 
that great sacrifice which it prefigured. 
The original word ^£^ kdphar signi- 
fies primarily to cover j not so much, 
however, in the sense of wrapping as 
with a garment, as in that of smearing 
or plaistering, it being applied, Gen. 6. 
14, to the act of coating the ark xvith 
pitch. Its radical sense, therefore, is 
rather that of an adhesive than a loose 
covering. From this primary notion of 
covering, it came to be applied by met- 
aphorical usage to the appeasing of 
anger, or to that act of an offending 
■party by which he succeeds in procuring 
favor and forgiveness from the person 
or party offended. In this sense it is 
applied to the appeasing of an angry 
countenance. Gen. 32. 20, ' For he said, 
I will appease him., (Heb. will cover his 
face) with the present.' 2 Sam. 21. 3, 
* What shall I do for you, and where- 
with shall I make the atonement (Heb. 
cover) V Prov. 16. 14, ^ The wrath of a 
king is as messengers of death, but a 
wise man will pacify it (Heb. will 
cover it).' Its predominant usage is in 
relation to the reconciliation effected 
between God and sinners, in which 
sense atonement for sin is the covering 
of sin, or the securing the sinner from 
punishment. Thus v/hen sin is par- 
doned, or its consequent calamity re- 
moved, the sin or person may be said to 



and 16. 24. Numb. 15. 25. 2 Chron. 29. 23, 
24. Rom. 5. 11 '' Micah 6. 6. i 2 Chrou. 
35. 11. Heb. 10. 11. 

be covered, made safe, expiated, or 
atoned. Accordingly we find the par- 
don of sin expressly called the covering 
of sin, Nehem. 4. 4, 5, ' Our God give 
them for a prey in the land of captivity, 
and cover not their iniquity, and let not 
their sin be blotted out from before 
thee.' Ps. 32. 1, ' Blessed is he whose 
transgression is forgiven, whose sin is 
covered.^ Ps. 85. 2, ' Thou hast brought 
back the captivity of Jacob ; thou hast 
forgiven the iniquity of thy people ; 
thou hast covered all their sin.' All 
such expiatory offerings pointed direct- 
ly to Christ, who is the grand atone- 
ment or reconciliation for the sins of 
men. Dan. 9. 24. 1 John 2. 2. Heb. 
10, S, 10. The burnt-offering, it is to 
be observed, had not, like the sin-offer- 
ing, respect to amj particular sin, but 
was designed to make atonement for sin 
in general. Thus it is said of Job, ch. 
1. 5, That he ^ offered burnt-offerings, 
(saying.) it may be that my sons have 
sinned.' 

5. And he shall kill the hullock, Heb. 
^niDI ve-shdhat ; in all probably an in- 
stance of the usage very common in 
Hebrew, where a verb is employed in a 
kind of impersonal sense, equivalent to 
the ' on dit,' one says of the French, or 
the 'man sagt,' id. of the German, both 
of which are evidently tantamount to 
the passive, it is said. The expression 
before us is not intended, we conceive, 
to assert that the offerer, or any one in 
particular, was to kill the victim, but 
simply to say that one, some one, shall 
kill it. In conformity with this idea, 
the Gr. preserves the indefinite form of 
the expression, by rendering it a6a^ovaiv 
they shall slay. A similar phraseology 
appears in the following passages. Gen. 
11.9,' Therefore is the name of it calh 
ed Babel (Heb. ^*^ MT^ 5^^p one called 



16 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, 
J^and sprinkle the blood round 
about upon the altar that is hy 

k ch. 3. 8. Heb. 12. 24. 1 Pet. 1. 2. 

the name of it Babel)? Gen. 16. 14, 
' Wherefore the well was called (&^1p 
one called the well) Beer-lahai-roi.' 
Deut. 32. 37, ' And he shall say (^ti^ 
one shall say — it shall be said) where 
are their gods,' &c. Examples of this 
usage might be almost indefinitely mul- 
tiplied, but those now adduced will 
probably be sufficient to confirm our 
rendering in the passage before us. It 
is highly probable that the offerer him- 
self and the common Levites united in 
the act of slaughtering the animal. 
Indeed Patrick labors to show from 
Maimonides, that ' the killing of the 
holy things might lawfully be done by 
a stranger (one not of Aaron's seed), 
yea, of the most holy things, whether 
they were the holy things of private 
persons, or of the whole congregation.' 
This would appear to be confirmed by 
2 Chron. 30. 17, w^here it is said that 
' there were many in the congregation 
that were not sanctified ; therefore the 
Levites had charge of the killing of the 
passovers for every one that was not 
clean ;' implying that if they had been 
clean they would have been authorized 

to perform the service themselves. 

IT Sprinkle the blood round about, ^c. 
This is doubtless the true sense of the 
original, but both the Gr. and the Lat. 
render it by the stronger term ^ pour,' 
^ pour out.' The sprinkling may be 
supposed perhaps to have been very 
copious, as Maimonides tells us that 
the priest was to sprinkle the blood 
twice on the upper surface of the altar, 
and the rest of the blood was to be 
poured out at the bottom of the altar 
on the south side — a rite to which there 
is doubtless allusion. Rev. 6. 9, ^ I saw 
under the altar (i. e. at the bottom of 
the altar) the souls of them that were 
slain for the word of God.' As the life 



the door of the tabernacle of the 
congregation. 

6 And he shall flay the burnt- 
offering, and cut it into his pieces. 

or soul was especially in the blood, so 
the ^ souls under the altar,' denotes the 
blood of the martyrs plentifully shed, 
and flowing as a sacrificial offering un- 
der the altar. The act of sprinkling 
the blood was, during every period of 
the Mosaic economy, exclusively the 
prerogative of the priesthood. It was 
in the effusion of blood, which is the 
life^ that the virtue of the sacrifice 
consisted, it being always understood 
that life went to redeem life. It was 
calculated and probably designed to 
remind the offerer that he deserved to 
have his own blood shed for his sins, 
and alluded moreover to the pacifying 
and purifying of the blood of Jesus shed 
for us for the remission of sins. Every 
reader of the New Testament knows 
how much our salvation is attributed 
to the blood of Christ j and this great 
evangelical truth was thus taught in 
shadow to the Israelites under the Law. 
They were by this rite most impres- 
sively taught that without the shedding 
of blood there was no remission of 
sins ; and however some of them might 
have dim and darkened views on this 
subject, while the veil was upon their 
minds, we at least know the truth. We 
know that the blood of all the animals 
shed at the altar of burnt-offering owed 
all its excellency to its being a type of 
that blood of Jesus by which he hath 
obtained eternal redemption for us. 

6. He shall flay. Gr. Ssipavreg they 
having flayed, shall divide,' &c. The 
Heb. tO^lT^n hiphshit, one shall flay, 
doubtless affords another instance of 
the impersonal form of speech illus- 
trated above. The meaning is simply 
that those whose office it was to per- 
form this part of the ceremony should 
strip the skin from the victim, and then 
cut up the body into its appropriate 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER I. 



17 



7 And the sons of Aaron the j shall lay the parts, the head, and 
priest shall put fire upon the altar, ! the fat, in order upon the wood 
and Uay the wood in order upon ; that is on the fire, Avhich is upon 
the fire. I the altar. 

8 And the priests, Aaron's sons, 9 But his inwards and his legs 

shall he wash in water: and the 

iGen. 22. 9. priest shall burn all on the altar, 



parts. This would seem from 2 Chron. 
29. 34, to have been usually the duty of 
the priests ; ' The priests were too few, 
and not able to flay all the burnt-offer- 
ings ] therefore their brethren the Le- 
vites helped them.' The skin in such 
cases, it is to be remembered, was a 
part of the perquisites of the priest. 
Lev. 7. 8. — ^ Cut it into his pieces. 
That is, into its natural, appropriate, 
suitable pieces, such as head, neck, 
shoulders, legs, &c., or as the Gr. ren- 
ders it, Kara /icXr?, according to its mem- 
be7's. Chal. ' He shall divide it by the 
members thereof.' It was to be done 
in an orderly and systematic manner, 
and not confusedly. ' Why were not 
the greater members cut into small 
pieces ? Because it is written, He 
shall cut it into the pieces thereof, and 
not. Shall cut it into pieces.' Maimoni- 
des. It is doubtless in allusion to this 
that the apostle says, 2 Tim. 2. 15, 
' rightly dividing (opBorufiovvra) the 
word of truth.' 

7. Shall put fire. Heb. D'^J;^ l^ri!] 
ndthenu ish, shall give fire ; by which 
is probably meant stirring up, cherish- 
ing, supplying fuel for, the fire that was 
originally kindled from heaven, and 
which was to be kept perpetually burn- 
ing on the altar, as may be seen from 
Lev. 6. 11. — M Lay the wood in order. 
Heb. I^^^J areku, implying, as rightly 
rendered in our version, an orderly and 
methodical arrangement, and spoken 
of the setting or furnishing a table, 
and marshalling the ranks of an army, 
Judg. 20. 22 ; also metaphorically of 
the proper disposition of words in a 
prayer or discourse, Ps. 5. 4. Job, 32. 
14.— 37. 19. 

2* 



8. Shall lay the parts. Heb. 'D^nin^n 

I hannethdhim. As the same word is 
rendered in v. 6. ' pieces,' it would have 
conduced more to the absolute precision 
which ought to be consulted in every 
translation of the Scriptures to have 
preserved that rendering in the present 
instance. Uniformity's sake alone is 
often sufiicient to determine a transla- 
tor in his choice of one out of two or 
more renderings. This regular divid- 
ing and laying on of the pieces of the 
sacrifice was observed in all cases of 
the Burnt-offering. Comp. Ex. 29. 17, 
18. 1 Kings, 18. 23, 33. Lev. 8. 20, 
21—9. 13. 

9. His inwards and his legs shall he 
wash in water. These parts, in order 
that no filthy adhesions might pollute 
the sacred offerings, were not to be 
burnt upon the altar imtil they had been 
thoroughly cleansed by washing in wa- 
ter ; a process which, according to Mai- 
monides, was three times repeated be- 
fore the ablution was thought to be 
complete. The typical import of this 
ceremony is distinctly intimated by 
the Apostle, Heb. 10. 22, ' Let us drav/ 
near with a true heart, in full assurance, 
of faith, having our hearts sprinkled 
from an evil conscience and our bo- 
dies washed with pure water. ^ — IT The 
priest shall hum all on the altar. Heb. 
"n^t^^pn hiktir, shall burn as a perfume j 
as the original properly implies. See 
the import of the term fully explained 
in the Note on Ex. 29. 13. It is not the 
usual word for consuming by fire, and 
consequently we lose in our translation 
the peculiar expressiveness of the origi- 
nal, especially when taken in connex- 
ion with what follows. — '■ The burning 



18 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



to he a burnt-sacrifice, an offering 
made by lire, of a u^sweet savour 
unto the Lord. 

] Tl And if his offering be of the 
flocks, namely, of the sheep, or of 
the goats, for a burnt-sacriftce ; he 
shall bring it a male ^without 
blemish. 

11 oAnd he shall kill it on the 
side of the altar northward before 
the Lord : and the priests, Aaron's 
sons, shall sprinkle his blood round 
about upon the altar : 

12 And he shall cut it into his 
pieces, with his head and his fat : 

r'« Gen. 8. 21. Ezek. 20. 28, 41. 2 Cor. 2. 
15. Eph. 5. 2. Phil. 4. 18. " yer. 3. "ver. 5. 

and broiling of the beasts could yield 
no sweet savor • but thereto was added 
wine, oil, and incense, by God's appoint- 
ment, and then there was a savor of 
rest in it. Oar prayers, as from us, 
would never please ; but as indited by 
the Spirit, and presented by Christ, they 
are highly accepted in heaven.' — Ti'app. 

M An offering made by fire, of a 

sweet savor unto the Lord. Heb. hJj^ 
rr^^ mn"^!} niDi^ olaU ishek reha nihovah, 
a fire-offering, an odor of rest ; or as 
the Gr. renders it, ^ a sacrifice of a sweet- 
smelling savor,' which words the apos- 
tle plainly had in view in writing Eph. 
5. 2, ^ Christ hath loved us, and hath 
given himself for us an offering and a 
sacrifice to God for a sweet -smelling 
savor. ^ See note on Gen. 8. 21. Hence 
■^ve learn that the holocaust, or whole 
burnt-offering, which, with the excep- 
tion of the skin, was entirely consumed, 
no part of it being left even for the food 
of the priests, typified the sacrifice and 
death of Christ for the sins of the world. 
Chal. ^ Which shall be received with 
favorable acceptation before the Lord.' 

The Burnt-offering of the Flock . 

10. If his offering be of the flocks. 
In the divine requirement of the various 
oblations, the circumstances of the 
offerers were kindly consulted. The 



and the priest shall lay them in 
order on the wood that is on the 
fire which is upon the altar : 

13 But he shall wash the in- 
wards and the legs With water: 
and the priest shall bring it all, 
and burn li upon the altar : it is a 
burnt-sacrifice, an offering made 
by fire, of a sweet savour unto the 
Lord. 

14 IT And if the burnt-sacrifice 
for his ofi'ering to the Lord be of 
fowls, then he shall bring his of- 
fering of pturtle-doves, or of young 
pigeons. 

P ch. 5. 7. and 12. 8. Luke 2. 24. 



less wealthy, who could not so well 
afford to ofier a bullock, would bring a 
sheep or a goat ; and those who were 
not able to do that were expected to 
bring a turtle-dove or a young pigeon. 
Thus it appears that the parents of our 
Lord, from their humble circumstances 
in life, brought this latter kind of offer- 
ing upon the purification of Mary, Luke 
2. 23-25. Indeed it will be observed 
throughout, that the directions respect- 
ing the poor man's offering are as mi- 
nute and particular as any ; intimating 
that God is no respecter of persons, and 
that his ministers are to be as anxious 
for the welfare, and as attentive to the 
interests, of the poorest of their flock, 
as of the most opulent. 

11. On the side of the altar northward . 
If the victim had been slain on the east 
of the altar, where the ashes were cast, 
it might have obstructed the entrance 
to the court ; on the south was the 
ascent to the altar, and on the west, the 
tabernacle j so that the north was on all 
accounts the most convenient quarter 
for this purpose, not only for the slaugh- 
ter of the sheep, but also of all the other 
animals offered. 

The Burnt-offering of Fowls. 

14. Turtle doves or of young pigeons. 
From the Heb. ^in tnr (toor) comes the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER I. 



19 



15 And the priest shall bring it | 
unto the altar, and wring off his j 
head, and burn it on the altar : 
and the blood thereof shall be j 
wrung out at the side of the altar : 

16 And he shall pluck aAvay his 
crop with his feathers, and cast it 
qbeside the altar on the east part, 
by the place of the ashes : 

q ch. 6. 10. 

Latin ' turtur,' and the English ' turtle,' 
generaJly rendered ' turtle-dove.' By a 
beautiful metaphor this bird is made by 
the Psalmist to denote the church : Ps. 
74. 19, * O deliver not the soul of thy 
turtle-dove unto the multitude of the 
enemies.' And Solomon. Cant. 2. 12, 
mentions the return of this bird as one 
of the indications of spring : ' The 
voice of the turtle is heard in our land.' 
Young pigeons (Heb. ^ sons of the 
dove') were thought preferable for 
food to the old, whereas the full grown 
turtle-dove was accounted more deli- 
cious than the young. The sacrifice 
was ordered accordingly. 

15. Wring off the head. Heb. "^"n 
mdlak. The original term occurs only 
here and Lev. 5. 8, so that we are chiefly 
dependent upon the ancient versions for 
its genuine sense. The Sept. renders it 
by a:ioKvi^o}j to cut with the nail. It 
probably means to make a section or 
cut in the head by pinching it with the 
fingers and nails, so that the blood 
might distil from the wound. In this 
case the head was not actually separated 
from the body, an idea which v/ould 
seem to be confirmed by Lev. 5. 8, 
where it is said that the priest should 
* wring ofi"his head (Heb ' cut with the 
nail ') but should not divide it asunder ;' 
i. e. should not entirely separate any 
one part from another. Though trans- 
lated ^ wring,' it is to be observed that 
it is wholly a different w^ord in the ori- 
ginal from that rendered ^ wrung ' in the 
close of the verse, 

16. With his feathers ; or, with the 
filth thereof. The latter is undoubtedly 



17 And he shall cleave it Avith 
the wings thereof, but rshall not 
divide it asunder : and the priest 
shall burn it upon the altar, upon 
the wood that is upon the fire : 
^it IS a burnt-sacrifice, an otFcring 
made by fire, of a sweet savour 
unto the Lord. 

>• Gen. 15. 10. ^ ygr. 9. 13. 

the true rendering, as in the Heb. the 
pronominal suffix for ' his ' is in the 
feminine gender, necessarily referring 
to ' crop,' and not to ' bird.' The drift 
of the precept is to order that the crop 
or maw with its contents should be cast 
away. This was done in order to ren- 
der the sacrifice clean, and it was to be 
cast as far as possible from the most 
holy place, to intimate that all moral 
uncleanness Vv^as to be removed from the 
w^orship of God. 

17. Shall cleave it with the wings 
thereof. That is, with the wings still 
remaining, though partially severed 
from the bod3^ The sacrifice of birds, 
Maimonides observes, was one of the 
most difficult services of the sanctuary j 
and as on this account the attention of 
the priest was not less engrossed by the 
poorest sacrifice than by the most splen- 
did, the necessity of attending to minute 
details in the duties of religion was 
strikingly inculcated. 

Remarks.^ — (1.) God, in his wisdom, 
has seen fit, for the m^ost part to address 
his creatures through the intervention 
of mediators ; and though the moral 
law was spoken in thunder and light- 
ning from Sinai, the ceremonial law, 
pointing to the great gospel sacrifice, 
was given in a milder voice from the 
mercy seat. 

(2,) Those sacrifices and offerings 
are peculiarly acceptable to God, which 
are prompted rather by voluntary im- 
pulse than by legal precept. 

(2.) Although the light of nature 
alone may suggest to man the duty of 
worshippijig thf» Creator, yet {\\(i proper 



20 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



mode of rendering him homage is not 
left to human invention, nut is matter 
of divine revelation. 

(3.) It is fit that the offerings which 
are designed for the greatest and best 
of Beings, the infinitely perfect Jeho- 
vah, should be the best, and most per- 
fect of their kind. 'A male without 
blemish.' 

(4.) In all our religious services and 
sacrifices our faith should aim to lay 
its hand upon the head of the one great 
Atoning Victim for sin. Failing of this 
our offerings are of little worth. 

(5.) Were it not for the solution 
afforded in the gospel, what an inexpli- 
cable mystery would be the whole Jew- 
ish ritual ! How strange the fact that 
the temple of God should so much re- 
semble a slaughter-house ! 

(9.) How precious in the estimation 
of the Most High must be the merit of 
Christ's sacrifice, that it should avail to 
convert the nauseous odor of burning 
flesh to a perfumed and refreshing in- 
cense ! 



CHAPTER II. 

THE MEAT-OFFERING. 

The second in the enumeration of the 
legal offerings, and that which occu- 
pies the present chapter is the Meat- 
offering. The original term is HTO^O 
minUiahf from the obsolete root tl'2J2 
mdna^hj to give, to bestow, and is equi- 
valent to gift, present, oblation. It is 
not exclusively, though it is predomi- 
nantly, applied to religious offerings of 
the bloodless species made to God. In 
some cases, it is spoken of gifts pre- 
sented to men, as Gen. 32. 13, ' And he 
(Jacob) took of that which he had with 
him a present (nn!])2) for Esau his bro- 
ther.' Gen. 43. 11, 'And their father 
Israel said unto them, Take of the best 
fruits of the land in your vessels, and 
carry down the man a present (nri2/G).' 
But the present made by Jacob to Esau 
was oi living things, viz. cattle, where- 
as that carried to Joseph was of things 



that had not life. In like manner both 
the offering of Cain, which was of the 
fruits of the earth, and that of Abel, 
which was of ihc firstlings of the flock, 
are each of them called ' Min'hah,' Gen. 
4. 3 — 5. So that the word in its general 
import, does imply things slain as well 
as things not slain, although some com- 
mentators have maintained the contrary. 
But in ordinary usage, its meaning was 
restricted to an off'ering made of fine 
flour, ^vhether of wheat or barley. The 
common rendering of the term in the 
English Bible by ' meat-offering' is in- 
correct according to the modern accep- 
tation of the word ' meat,' which is 
now applied exclusively to flesh, al- 
though at the time when our translation 
was made it appears to have denoted 
very nearly the same as the word ' food.' 
A more suitable rendering therefore at 
the present day would be ' meal-offer- 
ing,' ' flour-offering,' or even ' bread- 
offering,' as the flour, before it was of- 
fered, was generally, though not in every 
case, made into thin cakes or wafers, or 
something very nearly resembling 
bread. The materials of the Meat-of- 
fering were fine flour, with oil poured 
on it, and frankincense and salt added 
to it. The flour was either that of 
v/heat or barley, and might be presented 
in the form of flour, or it might be pre- 
sented after undergoing the process of 
baking, or frying, in the form of cakes 
or wafers. Sometimes the Meat-offer- 
ing, instead of being made of fine flour, 
consisted of the first fruits of the corn. 
In this case the ears were to be taken 
when full, but yet green ; to be parched 
or dried before the fire ; the corn to be 
beaten out ; and the offering then to be 
made with oil, frankincense, and salt, 
as before. 

The Meat-offerings were either pre- 
sented by themselves, or as an accom- 
paniment to the stated burnt-offerings. 
In the latter case they, together with 
their attendant drink-offerings, were 
wholly consumed on the altar ; but in 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IL 



2i 



the former, they were burnt only in 
part, the remainder being given to the 
priests for their support. It is of these 
that the present chapter treats. The 
part of the offering which was burnt, 
together with the frankincense, was 
called ' the memorial' of it, for reasons 
which are assigned in the note on v. 2. 
The meat-offerings which were not 
commanded by the divine law, but were 
the votive or voluntary oblations of in- 
dividuals, were of five kinds, consisting 
of some preparation of flour ; as 

1. Fine flour unbaked. 

2. Flour baked in a pan or on a flat 
plate. 

3. Flour baked in a frying pan. 

4. Flour baked in an oven. 

5. Flour made into a thin cake like a 
wafer. 

As to the leading moral design of the 
meat-offering, it is perhaps to be re- 
garded as mainly a grateful acknow- 
ledgment of the bounty and beneficence 
of God, as manifested in those gifts of 
his providence to w^hich we owe our 
daily bread, and the various ministra- 
tions to our physical comfort. At the 
same time, it is not, that we are aware, 
at all inconsistent with this to suppose, 
that it might also have had a typical 
purport kindred to that of most of the 
sacrificial offerings, which evidently 
pointed to Christ, and subordinately to 
his Church. From several passages it 
would seem natural to infer, that a 
propitiatory as well as a eucharistic 
meaning was couched under this cere- 
mony ; and if so, we cannot well avoid 
the inference that it pointed to the 
offering of the body of Christ as its 
grand realizing substance. Thus 1 
Sam. 3. 14, ' Therefore I have sworn 
unto the house of Eli, that the iniquity 
of Eli's house shall not be purged with 
sacrifice nor offering (riri^l2 min'hah) 
forever.' 1 Sam. 26. 19, ' If the Lord 
have stirred thee up against me, let him 
accept (Heb. smell) an offering 
(nriDlO).' Therefore v/hen Christ had 



come, he caused this Meat-offering as 
well as the slain sacrifices to cease ; 
Dan. 9. 27, ' He shall cause the sacrifice 
and the oblation (iir]'2J2) to cease.* 
And of the poor man's meat offering, it 
is expressly said. Lev. 5. 11-13, that it 
should ' make atonement for sins.' 
From this it appears that the Scriptures 
join the Meat-offering with the burnt- 
offering as an expiation for sin j and 
consequently that both have a typical 
allusion to the atoning sacrifice of 
Christ. But in this the import of the 
Min'hah does not seem to be exhausted. 
It represents also the persons and ser- 
vices of believers made acceptable in 
Christ, for there is no doubt that both 
Christ and his Church are frequently 
shadowed out by the same symbolical 
ordinances. In accordance with this 
we find it said. Is. 66. 20, ^ They shall 
bring all your brethren for an offering 
(nn3?2) out of all nations, &c., as the 
children of Israel bring an offering 
(nri5?2) in a clean vessel into the house 
of the Lord.' The accomplishment of 
this, the apostle intimates, is to be re- 
cognized in the results of his own min- 
istration of the gospel to the Gentiles, 
Rom. 15. 16, ' That I should be the 
minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, 
ministering the gospel of God, that the 
offering up (Trpoacpopa, oblation=T\niil2) 
of the Gentiles might be acceptable, 
being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.' 
But it is not the persons only of believers 
that we behold typically set forth by 
this offering. Their good works, their 
devoted services, the fruits of their 
graces, are also indicated by this fea- 
ture of the ancient economy. Ps. 141. 
2, ^ Let my prayer be set forth before 
thee, and the lifting up of my hands as 
the evening sacrifice (nriD^).' So 
when the Most High assured his people, 
Mai. 1. 10, that he ' would not accept 
an offering at their hands,' he adds, v. 
1 1 , ^ for from the rising of the sun even 
unto the going down of the same, my 
name shall be great among the Gen- 



22 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



CHAPTER 11. 
nd when any will offer aa meat- 
offering unto the Lord, his 

a ch. 6. 14. and 9. 17. Num. 15. 4. 

tiles ; and in every place incense shall 
be offered unto my name, and a pure 
offering (nri3?3) j' and this is fulfilled 
when ' men pray every where, lifting up 
holy hands.' — The remaining details 
will be given in the notes that follow. 

1. And when any will offer. Heb. 
i^^pri '^^ 11^531 venephesh ki takribj 
and a soul when it shall offer • i. e. a 
person or man. See note on Gen. 2. 7. 
as to the scriptural import of the word 
* soul.' The English idiom is precisely 
similar. Thus we say that such a place 
contains so many thousand souls; and 
in such a battle, so many souls per- 
ished. Shakspeare also speaks of a 
ship swallowed in the sea, and the 
' freighting souls^ within her, — IF A meat- 
offering. Heb. nnD^ 'P^P korhan 
min^hah, a gift-offering, a donative, for 
it is to be borne in mind that the offer- 
ing prescribed in this chapter was also 
of the votive or voluntary kind, like the 
animal oblations of the foregoing chap- 
ter, and therefore equally with them 
denominated "jUlIp korhan. — IT Shall 
pour oil upon it. To give it a grateful 
relish, making it more palatable to the 
priests, who were to eat part of it, v, 3. 
Oil was to the food of the Israelites 
what butter is to ours. We see from 
this how kindly the Most High consults 
the gratification of his servants while 
ordering the provisions of his own ta- 
ble. But the genius of the Levitical 
institute requires us to look beyond this 
for the adequate reason for the use of 
oil in these rites. This substance also 
has a mystical or symbolical scope, as 
we have shown in the note on Ex. 29. 7. 
Its unquestionable import is, that any 
offering which we offer should have 
that anointing of the Holy One of which 
John speaks so largely in his first epis- 
tle. That oil of divine grace, that prin- 



offering shall be of fine flour ; and 
he shall pour oil upon it, and put 
frankincense thereon : 
2 And he shall bring it to Aaron's 



ciple of holiness, which the Spirit of 
the Lord pours out upon the true be- 
liever's heart, is indispensable to the 
acceptance of our spiritual sacrifices. 
The unction of love, gratitude, rever- 
ence, holy joy, and of every gracious 
disposition, the fruit of the Spirit of 
grace, must be present to impart its vir- 
tues to our oblations, or they avail us 
nothing. — IT And put frankincense 
thereon. In order to cause a sweet 
smell in the court of the tabernacle, 
which would otherwise have been of- 
fensive in consequence of the vast quan- 
tities of flesh burnt there. But this 
was not all. The frankincense, like 
the oil, had a symbolical allusion. It 
represented that divine mediation and 
intercession of Christ, by which he 
perfumes and renders of a sweet smell 
all the prayers, praises, good works, 
and holy affections, of his servants. 
He is, in the language of the Song of 
songs, ch. 3. 6, ' like pillars of smoke, 
perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, 
and all powders of the merchant.' That 
the frankincense is applicable prima- 
rily and mainly to Christ is evident 
from its being wholly consumed by fire. 
No part of his work is borne by any but 
himself; nothing renders our services 
acceptable but his atoning, justifying, 
interceding grace. But when this fact 
is cordially admitted by us, and all the 
favor with which we meet attributed to 
the merit and mediation of Christ, then 
our services for his honor and glory, 
our oblations to his priests or his poor, 
our works of beneficence and kindness 
wrought for his sake, ^ come up as an 
odor of a sweet smell, a sacrifice ac- 
ceptable, well-pleasing to God.' As 
the sacrifice of Christ himself was most 
pleasing unto God, so are the services 
of all his people for Christ's sake. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IL 



23 



sons the priests : and he shall take 
thereout his handful of the flour 
thereof, and of the oil thereof, with 
all the frankincense thereof, and 
the priest shall burn ^the memorial 
of it upon the altar, to be an ofFer- 



b ver. 9. and ch. 5. 12. and 6. 15. and 24. 7. 
Isa. 66. 3. Acts 10- 4. 



2. Shall take thereout his handful. 
Heb. 'f )2p1 vekamets, shall grasp. Of 
this meal-offering a part only, that is to 
say, about an handful, was burnt, the 
rest being reserved for the priests' use ; 
but all the frankincense was burnt be- 
cause from it the priest could derive no 
advantage. IT Shall burn the memo- 
rial of it. Heb. I'lt^pn hikiirj shall 
reduce it to fume or vapor, shall evapo- 
rate it, as in the burning of incense. 
See the original term explained in the 
note on Ex. 29. 13. The part of the 
offering which the priest took out with 
his hand is called the ^memorial' of 
the meal or bread-offering, because it 
was a remembrancer of God's supreme 
dominion, a grateful acknowledgment 
that they held and enjoyed every thing 
of him as sovereign Proprietor, and by 
this act supplicated the continuance of 
it- It was designed to put him in mind, 
as it were, of his covenant promise to 
accept the services of his people ren- 
dered to him according to his command- 
ment ; in allusion to which it is said by 
the Psalmist, Ps. 20. 4, 'The Lord re- 
member all thine offerings, and accept 
thy burnt-sacrifices.' Acts 14. 4, ' Thy 
prayers and thine alms come up for a 
memorial before God.' The sin and 
jealousy-offerings, on the other hand, 
had no oil or incense mixed with them, 
because they were no offerings of gra- 
cious memorial, but such as brought in- 
iquity to remembrance, and were there- 
fore devoid of those elements which 
made them come up as a sweet-smell- 
ing savor before the Lord. Comp. Num. 
5. 15, Lev. 5, 11. A very prominent i 



I ing made by fire of a sweet savour 

i unto the Lord : 

I 3 And cthe remnant of the meat- 

I offering shall be Aaron's and his 
sons' : dit is a thing most holy of 
the offerings of the Lord made by 
fire. 

c ch. 7. 9. and 10. 12, 13. "^i Exod. 29. 37. 
Num. 18. 9. 

and hence it was employed in all those 
sacrifices which had respect to right- 
eousness, and the effects of which were 
attended with joy -, while on the other 
I hand it was excluded from those which 
had respect to sin, and the effect of 
which was attended mainly with sorrow. 
3. The remnant of the meat-offering 
shall be Aaron's and his sons\ That is, 
what remains after the priest has taken 
his handful of the flour and the oil, with 
all the frankincence, this shall belong 
to the priests, and shall be eaten by 
them alone, in the court of the taberna- 
cle, as a ' thing most holy j' whereas 
the less holy things, as tithes, first 
fruits, &c., might be eaten by their sons 

and daughters. Deut. 12. 5. IT A 

thing most holy. Heb. S^^lDIp 1D"lp 
kodesh kodoshim, holiness of holin esses, 
the Hebrew mode of expressing the 
superlative degree. A common dis- 
tinction was made by the Jews between 
things most holy and the lighter holy 
things, as they termed them. Of the 
former class are those of which none 
whosoever, or none but the priests and 
the sons of priests might eat, and that 
only in the sanctuary. Lev. 6. 16-26. 
Such were all whole burnt-offerings, all 
the sin-offerings, and all the peace-offer- 
ings for the whole congregation. The 
^ lighter holy things ' were such as 
might be eaten by those who were not 
priests in any place within the camp, 
and subsequently within the city of Je- 
rusalem, as all the peace-offerings of 
particular individuals, the paschallamb, 
the tithes, and the firstlings of cattle. 
In regard to the meal Or bread-offering, 



import of oil as a symbol is that of joy, i it has been moreover suggested that a 



24 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



4 IT And if thou bring an oblation 

particular sacredness attached to that 
from its having been designed as a type 
of the Christian sacrifice, or the Lord's 
Supper, in which it was virtually con- 
tinued in the bread made of fine wheaten 
flour, which formed a part of that ordi- 
nance. 

4. Baken in an oven. Heb. ^I^n 
n&fc<50 macphl'h tannoon^the baking of 
the oven. As there were several ways 
in which the bread offering, or Min'hah 
might be prepared, rules are here given 
applicable to these several modes 5 the 
first case being where it was baked in 
an oven (Heb. ^"]'2t] tannur), on which 
we subjoin an extended article from the 
Pictorial Bible, in loc. ^ The ovens 
of a people continually on the move 
could have little resemblance to our 
own, and we can only discover what 
they probably were by a reference to 
existing usages in the East. The trade 
of a baker is only carried on in large 
towns ; people bake their own bread 
daily in villages and encampments, and 
to a very considerable extent in towns 
also. It is evident, therefore, that when 
individual families bake every day so 
much bread only as is required for that 
day, recollecting at the same time that 
fuel is in general scarce, it is necessary 
that the oven should be small, and con- 
suming but little fuel. These requisites 
are fully met in the common family 
ovens of Western Asia. That which 
may be considered the most general is 
a circular pit in the earthen floor, 
usually between four and five feet deep, 
and about three feet in diameter. This 
pit is well plastered within 5 and the 
dough, Avhich is in large oval or round 
cakes — not thicker than pancakes, which 
in appearance they very much resemble 
when done — is dexterously thrown 
against the sides of the pit, which has 
been previously heated, and has the 
glowing embers still at the bottom. 
This cake is not turned; and, from its 



of a meat-ofTering baken in the 



thinness, is completely done in two or 
three minutes. Its moisture being then 
absorbed, it would fall from the sides 
of the oven into the fire, were it not re- 
moved in proper time. This bread is 
usually flexible and soft, and may be 
rolled up like paper j but if sutfered to 
remain long enough, it becomes hard 
and crisp on the side which has been in 
contact with the oven ; but it is seldom 
suffered to attain this state, although 
we, who have lived for about two years 
on this sort of bread, thought it far pref- 
erable in this form. It is to be ob- 
served, that this pit is not exclusively 
an oven, but, particularly in Persia, is 
often the only fire-place for general 
purposes which is to be found in cot- 
tages, and even in some decent houses. 
Whether these were the ^ ovens ' of the 
Hebrews in the desert, it is difficult to 
determine. They are formed with 
little expense or labor ; but are more 
generally found in towns and villages 
than among the nomade tribes of the 
desert. The other things resembling 
ovens, act more or less upon the same 
principle as that which we have de- 
scribed. They are of various kinds ; 
but they may generally be described as 
strong unglazed earthen vessels, which 
being heated by an internal fire, the 
bread is baked by being stuck against 
the sides, in the manner already noticed. 
Either the interior or outer surface is 
used for this purpose, according to the 
construction of the vessel, and the de- 
scription of bread required. The com- 
mon bread is sometimes baked on the 
outside of the heated vessel ; and thus 
also is baked a kind of large crisp bis- 
cuit, as thin as a wafer, which is made 
by the application of a soft paste to the 
heated surface, which bakes it in an in- 
stant. Of this description, no doubt, is 
the wafer-bread which we find men- 
tioned in V. 4 and elsewhere. The ovens 
of this sort with which the writer is 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER II. 



25 



oven, it shall be unleavened cakes 
of fine flour mingled with oil, or 
unleavened wafers eanointed with 
oil. 

e Exod. 29. 2. 

most familiar are nearly three feet high, 
and about fifteen inches in diameter at 
the top, which is open. It gradually 
widens to the bottom, where there is a 
hole for the convenience of withdraw- 
ing the ashes. When the inside is ex- 
clusively used for baking, the outside 
is usuall)^ coated with clay, the better 
to concentrate the heat. We have seen 
them used under various circumstances. 
Even the vessels navigating the Tigris 
are usually furnished with one of them, 
for baking the daily supply of bread ; 
and they are sometimes built to the 
deck for standing use. The Arab sail- 
ors have them also in their vessels on 
the Red Sea, and elsewhere. Some- 
times a large water-vessel, with the 
bottom knocked out, is made to serve 
as a substitute, and goes by the same 
name. This name {tenur) is as nearly 
as possible, the original Hebrew \vord 
^nyt2 tanriui', translated ' oven ' in the 
text. Ovens, somewhat similar, are 
frequently used in houses in the place 
of the hole in the floor already men- 
tioned, especially in apartments which 
have not the ground for their floor. 
They are then not only used for cooking 
and baking bread, but for warming the 
apartment. The top is then covered 
with a board, and over this a large 
cloth or counterpane is spread, and the 
people sit around, covering their legs 
and laps with the counterpane. So also 
the pit in the floor, when not in use for 
cooking or baking bread, is in winter 
covered over, and warms the apartment, 
in much the same manner. It remains 
to add, that bread is sometimes baked 
on an iron-plate placed over the opening 
at the top of the oven. That the ovens 
of the Israelites in the desert were some- 
thing on the principle of these earthen 
ovens, there is not much reason to 
3 



5 If And if thy oblation 5e a meat- 
offering baken in a pan, it shall be 
of fine flour unleavened, mingled 
with oil. 



question ; and it is equally probable 
that those ovens which are mentioned 
after their settlement in Palestine were 
one of the two, or both the modifications 
of the same principle which we have 
described as being ordinarily exhibited 
in the houses of Western Asia.^—Pict. 

Bib. IT Unleavened cakes. Heb. ni^H 

n^/3 halloth matzoth, cakes of unlea- 
venednesseSf an intensitive mode of ex- 
pression equi^^alent to ' altogether un- 
leavened.' On the import of leaven in 
the system of sacrifices see note on Ex. 

12.' 8. IT Mingled with oil. See note 

on Ex. 29. 2. If the cakes were made 
somewhat thick, the oil was poured in 
and mingled in the kneading ; but if 
they were thin like a wafer, the oil was 
only smeared over the surface, simply 
to anoint the substance, but whether 
before or after the baking, is uncertain, 
though Maimonides supposes the latter. 
5. Baken in a pan. Heb. ri^ni^il ^5^ 
al hammahabath. ' Dr. Boothroyd, 
availing himself of our now improved 
knowledge of the East, translates ' on a 
fire-plate,' instead of ^ in a pan.' He is 
doubtless correct. In the preceding 
note we have mentioned a mode of 
baking bread on an iron plate laid on 
the top of the oven ; but a more simple 
and primitive use of a baking plate is 
exemplified among the nomade tribes of 
Asia. We first witnessed the process 
at a small encampment of Eelauts in 
the north of Persia. There was a con- 
vex plate of iron (copper is often in use) 
placed horizontally about nine inches 
from the ground, the edges being sup- 
ported by stones. There was a slow 
fire underneath, and the large thin cakes 
w^ere laid upon the upper or convex sur- 
face, and baked with the same efiect as 
when stuck to the sides of an oven ; but 
rather more slowly. The thin wafer 



26 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



6 Thou shalt part it in pieces, 
and pour oil thereon : it is a meat- 
offering. 

7 1[ And if thy oblation be a 

bread of soft paste can be baked by the 
same process, which is recommended to 
the wandering tribes by the simplicity 
and portability of the apparatus. We 
believe that a flat plate is sometimes 
employed in this way, though we do not 
recollect to have witnessed its use. 
Chardin thinks that this process was in 
use long before ovens of any kind were 
known ; and he is probably right. Un- 
leavened oatmeal cakes, baked on an 
iron plate called a ' girdle,' are still 
very general in Scotland, and also in the 
north of England.' — Pict. Bib. 

6. Thou shalt part it in pieces^ and 
pour oil thereon. ' We here see bread, 
after being baked, broken up again and 
mingled with oil. Was this an extraor- 
dinary and peculiar preparation for the 
altar, or was it a preparation in com- 
mon use among the Hebrews ? We in- 
cline to the latter opinion, as it seems 
to differ very little from a common and 
standard dish among the Bedouin Arabs. 
This is made of unleavened paste, baked 
in thin cakes, which are afterwards 
broken up, and thoroughly kneaded with 
butter, adding sometimes honey, and 
sometimes milk, but generally employ- 
ing butter alone for the purpose. This 
second kneading brings it into the state 
in which it is eaten with great satisfac- 
tion by the Arabs. The only difference 
between this and the preparation in the 
text, is the use of butter instead of oil ; 
and in its not being said here that the 
bread was kneaded anew, but only that 
it was broken up and mingled with oil. 
These points of difference are not very 
essential. The Bedouins, as a pastoral 
people, have no oil ; but are very fond 
of it when it can be obtained : butter, 
therefore, as used by them, may be re- 
garded as a substitute for the ^ oil ' of 
the text. And as to the want of a 
second kneading in the text, it is by no 



meat-offering balten in the frying- 
pan, it shall be made of fine flour 
with oil. 

8 And thou shalt bring the meat- 
means certain that such kneading did 
not take place, even though it is not 
mentioned. Besides the Bedouins do 
not always knead the broken bread 
again with butter, but are content to 
soak or dip the broken morsels in melt- 
ed butter. It is probable that the pre- 
sent text explains the mingling with oil 
mentioned in vv. 4 and 7, better than by 
supposing that the paste was tempered 
with oil before being baked. Using oil 
with bread continues to be a very com- 
mon practice in the East ; and the 
Bedouin Arabs, and generally other 
Orientals, are fond of dishes composed 
of broken bread, steeped not only in oil, 
butter, and milk, but also in prepara- 
tions of honey, syrups, and vegetable 
juices. Oil only is allowed in the 
^ meat offerings,' honey being expressly 
interdicted in v. 11, and this shows that 
the use of honey with bread was even 
thus early common among the Israel- 
ites.'— Pk^ Bib. 

7. Baken in the frying-pan. ' There 
is in use among the Bedouins and others 
a shallow earthen vessel, somewhat re- 
sembling a frying-pan, and which is 
used both for frying, and for baking one 
sort of bread. Something of this sort 
is thought to be intended here. There 
is also used in Western Asia a modifi- 
cation of this pan, resembling the East- 
ern oven, which Jerome describes as a 
round vessel of copper, blackened on the 
outside by the surrounding fire, which 
heats it within. This might be either 
the ' oven ' or the ' pan ' of the present 
chapter. This pan-baking is common 
enough in England, where the villagers 
bake large loaves under inverted round 
iron pots, with embers and slow-burning 
fuel heaped upon them. But it is pro- 
bable that the fire-plate, which we have 
noticed under v. 5, is really intended 
here, and that the ' pan ' there, is the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER II. 



27 



offering that is made of these things 
unto the Lord : and when it is 
presented unto the priest, he shall 
bring it unto the altar. 

9 And the priest shall take from 
the meat-offering % memorial 
thereof, and shall burn it upon the 
altar : it is an goffering made by- 
fire, of a sweet savour unto the 
Lord. 

10 And hthat which is left of the 
meat-offering shall be Aaron's and 
his sons'; it is a thing most holy, 
of the offerings of the Lord made 
by fire. 

f ver. 2. e; Exod. 29. 18. ^ yer. 3. 

' frying-pan ' of the present text. This 
seems to us very probable, as the name 
given by the Bedouins to this utensil is 
tajen, which is nearly identical with the 
name (rrjyavov) which the Septuagint 
gives to the ' pan ' in v. 5. It is useful 
to obtain this etymological identifica- 
tion of the Arabian tajen v/ith one of the 
^ pans ' of this chapter, but it is of little 
importance to determine which ^ pan' it 
is. Upon the whole, the oven, the pan, 
and the frying-pan of vv. 4, 5, and 7, 
may, as it appears to us, be referred 
with much confidence to the clay oven, 
the metal plate, and the earthen vessel 
w^hich we have noticed.' — Pict. Bib. 

11. No leaven nor any honey. That 
is, as it should seem, neither sour nor 
sweet ; nothing of the fermenting kind, 
which would have an unkindly efiect, 
when eaten, upon the animal economy. 
But here also, we trace a moral mean- 
ing. Leaven is a well-known emblem 
of pride and hypocrisy. These swell 
the heart, and pufi* it up with self-im- 
portance and self-deceit. This w^as 
especially the leaven of the Pharisees, 
who made their prayers, and gave their 
alms, and did all, to be seen of men. 
Leaven is also used as an emblem of 
malice and wickedness, as we learn 
from the words of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 
5. 8, ^ Therefore let us keep the feast, 



11 No meat-offering which ye 
shall bring unto the Lord shall be 
made with ileaven : for ye shall 
burn no leaven, nor any honey, in 
any offering of the Lord made by 
fire. 

12 1[ kAs for the oblation of the 
first-fruits, ye shall offer them unto 
the Lord : but they shall not be 
burnt on the altar for a sweet sa- 
vour. 

13 And every oblation of thy 
meat-offering ishalt thou season 

i ch. 6. 17. See Matt. 16. 12. Mark 8. 
15. Luke 12. 1. 1 Cor. 5. 8. Gal. 5. 9. 
k Exod. 22. 29. ch. 23. 10, 11. i Mark 9. 
49. Col. 4. 6. 



not with the old leaven, neither with 
the leaven of malice and wickedness, 
but with the unleavened bread of sincer- 
ity and truth.' Honey, in like man- 
ner, may well be considered as the em- 
blem of the unwholesome sweetness of 
sensual indulgence and worldly plea- 
sure. And these we are well assured 
are perfectly inconsistent with the ac- 
ceptance of any offering which we may 
profess to bring to God. The honey of 
sensual gratification v/ill make polluted 
and abominable any religious oblation 
with which it may be mixed. 

12. As for the oblation of the first- 
fruit Sy ye shall offer them, ^c. A ins- 
worth very plausibly suggests that this 
is but a continuation of the ordinance 
respecting the use of leaven and honey, 
of which, and not of first-fruits, he un- 
derstands the word ' them' in this con- 
nexion. The verse contains a single 
exception to the rule given above. 
There was one case in which leaven 
and honey might be used, to wit, with 
the first-fruits. With them they might 
be offered, but not burnt upon the altar. 
This also is the interpretation of Ro- 
senmuller. 

13. Every oblation of thy meat-offer' 
ing shalt thou season with salt. Salt is 
the opposite to leaven, as it preserves 
from putrefaction and corruption, and 



28 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



was therefore used to signify the purity 
and persevering fidelity necessary in 
the worshippers of God. It was called 
the ^ salt of the covenant/ because as 
salt was incorruptible, so was the cove- 
nant and promise of Jehovah, which on 
this account is called 2 Chron. 13. 5, ^ a 
covenant of salt ;' i. e. an everlasting 
covenant. But in order to obtain an 
adequate idea of the reasons which 
prompted the use of this article, and 
made it so indispensable in the services 
of the Jewish altar, we are to remem- 
ber that the sacrifices were a kind of 
feast, in which those who partook of 
them were for the time being the guests 
of God, and eating and drinking at his 
table. But it was by eating and drink- 
ing together, that all important cove- 
nants were anciently ratified and con- 
firmed, and as salt was of course never 
wanting at such entertainments, it came 
at length to be regarded as a symbol of 
friendship, and the phrase ^ covenant 
of salt' was but another name for the 
most firm, enduring, and inviolable 
compact. In like manner, salt among 
the ancients was the emblem of friend- 
ship and fidelity, and therefore was used 
in all their sacrifices and covenants. 
No part of their religious ceremonies is 
more prominent than that which con- 
sists in the use of salt. Thus in Vir- 
gil, ^n. Lib. II. 1. 133: 

* Mihi sacra parari 
Et salsae fruges, et circum tempora vittse.' 

^ For me the sacred rites were prepared, 
and the salted cake, and fillets to bind 
about my temples.' Servius' explana- 
tion is, ^ Salt and barley, called salted 
meal, with which they used to sprinkle 
the forehead of the victim, the sacrifi- 
cial fire, and the knives.' From the 
' mola salsa,' salted cakCy of the Latins, 
were derived the words immolo, immo- 
latiOj to immolate, immolation, and this 
by synecdoche came to be applied to 
the whole process of sacrificing. So 
after the salted meal it was customary 
to pour wine on the head of the victim, 



which by that ceremony was said to be 
macta, i. magis aucta, augmented or in- 
creased, whence the term mactatio in 
the heathen sacrifices to express the 
killing of the victim immediately after 
the affusion of the wine. But as to the 
sacred use of salt Homer afibrds several 
distinct allusions to it in the religious 
rites mentioned in the Iliad. Thus : — 

< Then near the altar of the darting king, 
Disposed in rank, their hecatomb they bring ; 
With water purify their hands and take 
The sacred offering of the salted cake.^ 

II. I. 1. 584 

And again : — 

* Above the coals the smoking fragment burns, 
And sprinkles sacred salt from lifted urns.' 
Il, IX. I. 281. 

Nearly every traveler who has visited 
the modern nations of the East, has fur- 
nished us with striking anecdotes illus- 
trative of the sacredness with which 
salt was regarded as an emblem of 
fidelity in all their compacts. Thus 
Baron Du Tott, speaking of one who 
was desirous of his acquaintance, says, 
upon his departure, ' He promised in a 
short time to return. I had already 
attended him half way down the stair- 
case, when stopping, and turning briskly 
to one of my domestics. Bring me direct- 
ly, said he, some bread and salt. What 
he requested was brought : when, taking 
a little salt between his fingers, and put- 
ting it with a mysterious air on a bit of 
bread, he eat it with a devout gravity, 
assuring me that I might now rely on 
him.' And D'Herbelot remarks, that 
^ among other exploits which are re- 
corded of Jacoub hen Laith, he is said 
to have broken into a palace, and having 
collected a very large booty, which he 
was on the point of carrying away, he 
found his foot kicked something which 
made him stumble 5 putting it to his 
mouth, the better to distinguish it, his 
tongue soon informed him it was a lump 
of salt ; upon this, according to the 
morality, or rather superstition, of the 
country, where the people considered 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER II. 



29 



with salt; neither slialt thou suffer 
inthe salt of the covenant of thy 
God to be lacking from thy meat- 
offering : "with all thine offerings 
thou shalt offer salt. 

14 And if thou offer a meat-offer- 
ing of thy first-fruits unto the 
Lord, othou shalt offer for the 
meat-offering ^ of thy first-fruits, 
green ears of corn dried by the 

^^ Numb. IS. 19. " Ezek. 43. 24. o ch. 
9,3 10, 14. 

salt as a symbol and pledge of hospi- 
tality, he was so touched that he left all 
his booty, retiring without taking away 

any thing with him.' IT Neither 

shalt thou suffer, 8fC. That is, ye are 
not to imagine, that because the Lord's 
share of the offering is to be consumed 
by fire, and not really eaten, ye may 
therefore dispense with seasoning it. 
Every thing that is offered to him must 
be the best and most savory of its kind. 

14. Green ears of corn dried by the 
fire. They dried them in the fire, in 
the green ear^ because that otherwise 
from their moisture they would not 

admit of being ground in a mill. 

^ Corn beaten out of full ears. Heb. 
'iih^'D 1D^^ geres karmel, small broken 
corn of the green ear. The original 
Heb. Vj'^^ geres, has the import of some- 
thing crushed^ broken, pounded, for 
which the Chal. has ' broken-grains,' or 
as we should term it, ' grits.' The Gr. 
renders the whole clause vsa -acppvyi-ieva 
Xi-^pot eoLKta young parched grains 
broken in the mill. These first fruits 
had a typical reference to Christ, who 
is thus denominated, 1 Cor. 15. 20, and 
by whom all the rest of the harvest is 
sanctified. To the preparatory parch- 
ing, breaking, and grinding, we see per- 
haps an allusion in the words of the pro- 
phet. Is. 53. 5, ' He was wounded for 
our transgressions, he was bruised for 
our iniquities.' 

Remarks. — (3.) ^ The remnant of the 

meat-offering shall be Aaron's.' In 

every dispensation God has evinced a 

3* 



fire, even corn beaten out of pfull 

ears. 

^ 15 And qthou shalt put oil upon 

it, and lay frankincense thereon : 

it is di meat-offering. 

16 And the priest shall burn rthe 
memorial of it, part of the beaten 
corn thereof, and part of the oil 
thereof, with all the frankincense 
thereof: it is an offering made by 
fire unto the Lord. 

P 2 Kings 4. 42. q ver. 1. r ver. 2. 

kind concern for the maintenance of 
those who were devoted to ministry in 
sacred things. Those who labor in the 
word are to be competently supported. 
'■ Do ye not know that they which min- 
ister about holy things live of the things 
of the temple ? And they which wait 
at the altar are partakers with the altar. 
Even so hath the Lord ordained that 
they v/hich preach the Gospel should 
live of the Gospel.' 1 Cor. 9. 13, 14. 

(8.) ' When it is presented unto the 
priest.' As none of the ancient sacred 
offerings were to be presented imme- 
diately to God, but were first put into 
the hand of the priest, and through him 
offered upon the altar, so spiritual 
sacrifices under the Gospel are not 
available in the sight of God, unless 
tendered to him through Jesus Christ, 
the great High Priest of the New Tes- 
tament. 

(11.) Especial care is to be taken 
not only that our religious services be 
cleansed from the leaven of hypocrisy, 
but that they be thoroughly pervaded by 
the ^ salt ' of grace. Col. 4. 6, ' Let 
your speech be always with salt, sea- 
soned with grace.' Mark 9, 49, ^ Every 
sacrifice shall be seasoned with salt.' 

(14.) If the ^first-fruits' of the har- 
vest field were of old so peculiarly ac- 
ceptable to God, how much more must 
he be pleased now with the first-fruits 
of the Spirit, and the expressions of an 
early piety in the young. The ' green 
ears ' of youthful devotion will natural!}^ 
be followed by the ripened sheaves of a 



30 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490, 



godly old age, and in this form gathered 
into the garners of eternal life. 



CHAPTER III. 

THE PEACE-OFFERING. 

Pursuing the scriptural order of the 
specified ofierings under the law, we 
come in the present chapter to that 
which is denominated the Peace-offer- 
ing. The Heb. term thus rendered is 
tD^^Q^ilD shelc2mim, from the root D^!D 
shcllam, to make up, make good, restore, 
repay ; and thence to make up a differ- 
ence, to effect a reconciliation, to he at 
peace- The leading ideas, therefore, 
conveyed by the term, are those either 
of retribution or oi peace • and the term 
peace in the Scripture generally denotes 
either the mutual concord of friends, 
or a state of prosperity. These different 
senses assigned to the root have led to 
different expositions of the appellation 
derived from it. On the one hand, it is 
held, that the idea of retribution, or 
recompence, is prominent in the name 
given to this class of sacrifices, and that 
it indicates the division or distribution 
made of them into three parts, one for 
God, one for the offerers, and one for 
the priests. This opinion is maintained 
by the author of a Jewish treatise en- 
titled ^^DD Siphra, who says, * they 
were so called because a prescribed 
portion of them fell to the share of each 
party.' On the other hand, it is held 
by some, that the other sense of the 
root, namely, that of concord is domi- 
nant in the derivative, and that the 
name of these oblations denotes their 
being symbols of friendship between 
God, the priests, and the offerers, to 
each of whom was allotted a certain 
portion of them. The opinion, how- 
ever, is more simple and natural and 
therefore more probable, which regards 
the combined ideas of prosperity and 
retribution or requital as prominent in 
the term, and that this class of offerings 
is so called because they were alwaj^s 
presented in reference to a prosperous 



state of affairs, cither obtained and 
gratefully acknowledged, or supplicat- 
ed. A ^ sacrifice of peace-offerings' 
therefore is properly a ' sacrifice of pay- 
offerings, of requitals, of retributions, 
or pacifications,' and was offered (1.) 
Upon the recovery of peace with God in 
consequence of an expiation for some 
sin committed ; Hos. 14. 2. (2.) As 
an expression of thanksgiving for mer- 
cies received ; Lev. 7. 12. Judg, 20. 26. 
1 Chron, 21. 26. (3.) On the perform' 
ance of a vow, as Ps. 56. 13, ^ Thy vows 
are upon me, God; I will render 
praises (Heb. ^ will repay confessions ') 
unto thee.' Prov. 7. 14, ' I have peace- 
offerings \srii\i me (Heb. 'peace-offer- 
ings are (were) upon me,' i. e. the obli- 
gation of peace-offerings) ; this day 
have I paid my vows ;' this kind of 
peace-offering being vowed on condition 
that a particular mercy were bestowed, 
was performed after the condition was 
granted. By the Gr. the original word 
is rendered here and elsewhere dvaia 
coiTYjpLov sacrifice of salvation, (or safe- 
ty) ', though sometimes by eiprmK-q a 
pacifying or peace-offering ; and by 
the Chal. a ' a sacrifice of sanctities (or 
sanctifications),' probably because none 
but clean and sanctified persons were 
permitted to eat of it ; Lev. 7. 19, 20. 
Sol. Jarchij a Jewish Commentator, 
says they are called peace-offerings, 
' because they bring peace into the 
world, and because by them there is 
peace to the altar, to the priests, and 
to the owners.' This, however, is ra- 
ther the effect of the expiatory than of 
the eucharistic offerings. Yet it is re- 
markable that as these sacrifices re- 
ceived their original appellation from 
their being offered in thanksgiving or 
supplication for prosperity, so because 
they were employed by the offerers 
themselves in sacred feasts, they were 
also very frequently designated by ano- 
ther name t2*^nDt zeba^him, which is 
the appropriate term for victims slaugh- 
tered for sacrifices and for banquets. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IIL 



31 



Yet this is plainly a metaphorical sense 
of the term, by which we are in no dan- 
ger of being misled. From their being 
principally consumed by the offerers at 
the feast that followed the oblation, 
Michaelis, Boothroyd, and others, pre- 
fer to translate the term ' feast-sacri- 
fice' rather than ' peace-offering ;' while 
others again choose to render the ori- 
ginal ' thank-offering.' But w^e deem 
it best to give the most literal render- 
ing and supply all deficiencies by the 
requisite explanations. 

As intimated above, the Peace-offer- 
ings were of a threefold character, vgI- 
untary. votive^ and eucharistic. The 
last of these was offered in view of spe- 
cial favors and blessings enjoyed ; the 
two former for mercies desired and im- 
plored. In Lev. 7. 11, 12, the Peace- 
offering is evidently regarded as an act 
of thanksgiving for mercies received, 
and as such is referred to by David, Ps. 
107. 22, ' Let them sacrifice the sacri- 
fices of thanksgiving {tll^t^ ^r\'2l IH^T'^ 
yizheUiu ziVh'd tod'ih)^ and declare his 
works with rejoicing.' So also Ps. 116. 
16, 17, <• O Lord, truly I am thy ser- 
vant, I am thy servant, and the son of 
thine handmaid ; thou hast loosed my 
bonds, I will offer to thee the sacri- 
fice of thanksgiving (milTi iRut zeha'h 
tod'cli), and will call upon the name of 
the Lord.' Hence it was that Heze- 
kiah, 2 Chron. 29. 20, after having abol- 
ished all idolatrous rites, and restored 
the ancient worship, directed eucha- 
ristic sacrifices to be offered. Such too, 
it is evident, were offered by Manasseh, 
2 Chron. 33. 16, after his restoration to 
his country and kingdom. The general 
doctrine held by the Jews in respect to 
this kind of oblations is thus expressed 
by Aben Ezra ; ' The design of an eu- 
charistic sacrifice is, that any person 
delivered from trouble may give praise 
to God on account of it.' Equivalent 
to this is the language of Sol. Jarchi ; 
' An eucharistic sacrifice ought to be 
offered to God by every one who has ex- 
perienced any thing like a miracle , who 



has sailed over the ocean, or traveled 
through deserts ; who has been deliver- 
ed from prison, or recovered from dis- 
ease ; for they are under the greatest 
obligations to praise God.' Allusions 
also to the Peace-offering as a votive or 
voluntary oblation occur in the follow- 
ing passages, from which it will appear 
that such offerings were generally vowed 
in times of danger and distress. Jon. 
2. 9, ^ I will sacrifice unto thee with the 
voice of thanksgiving, I will pay that I 
have vowed ; salvation is of the Lord.' 
2 Sam. 15. 8, ' For thy servant vowed a 
vow while I abode at Geshur, in Syria, 
saying, if the Lord shall bring me again 
indeed to Jerusalem, then I will serve 
the Lord ;' i. e. will serve him with a 
peace or thank-offering. One of the 
most striking instances of this kind 
occurs in the case of the eleven tribes, 
Judg. 20. 26, who from a zeal of God's 
house had undertaken to punish the 
Benjamites for the horrible wickedness 
they had committed. Twice had the 
confederate tribes gone up against the 
Benjamites, and twice been repulsed 
with the loss of twenty thousand men. 
But being still desirous to know and do 
the will of God in this matter, as it was 
his quarrel only that they were aveng- 
ing, ' they went up to the house of God 
and wept and fasted until even, and 
offered burnt-offerings and peace-offer- 
ings unto the Lord ;' and thus God de- 
livered the Benjamites into their hands, 
so that with the exception of six hun- 
dred only, who fled, the whole tribe of 
Benjamin, male and females, was ex- 
tirpated. So Jacob, Gen. 28. 20-22, and 
Jephthah, Judg. 30. 31 ; and so David, 
Ps. 66. 13, 14, ' I will pay thee my vows, 
which my lips have uttered, and my 
mouth hath spoken when I was iu 
trouble.' From this it appears that this 
kind of sacrifices was very ancient, and 
was grafted upon that innate desire to 
testify a mind grateful for divine bene- 
fits, the traces of which are discoverable 
in all ages and all nations. 

The material of the Peace-offering 



32 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



was to be either of the herd or the flock, 
the greater or lesser animals, but never 
of the fowl, probably because their 
diminutive size did not admit of the 
three-fold division between God, the 
priest, and the people. Like the hole- 
caustic offerings, it must be without 
blemish ; but unlike to them, it might 
be either male or female. Of the rites 
and ceremonies pertaining to the obla- 
tion, some were in common with the 
other sacrifices, and some peculiar to 
itself. It must be brought to the door 
of the tabernacle j the owner must lay 
his hand on it ; it must be killed, and 
the blood shed and sprinkled on the altar 
round about ; and finally it must be 
burnt upon the altar, except the reserved 
parts. In these respects the details of 
the oblation arc very similar to those 
of the burnt-ollering. But peculiar to 
itself was the division of the offering 
into three parts — the limitation of the 
time for eating it — the addition of leaven 
— and the prohibition of fat and blood ; 
each of which particulars will be duly 
considered in its proper place. 

The victim of the Peace-ofFering was 
to be divided between God, and the 
priest, and the people ; to each a por- 
tion. The part to be burnt ' before the 
Lord upon the altar, upon the burnt- 
offering,' consisted of all the suet per- 
taining to the inwards, the two kidneys, 
the caul upon the liver, and all the fat. 
This was the Lord's portion. Another 
was assigned to the priest. This con- 
sisted of the breast and the right 
shoulder. The breast was to be waved 
to and fro, and the shoulder was to be 
heaved upwards before the Lord, in 
token of their being appropriated to his 
house and service. The breast was 
then given to the priests in general, 
while the shoulder remained the per- 
quisite of him who officiated. A por- 
tion also of the leavened bread was to 
be given to the priest. All the remain- 
der of the oblation, which was by far 
the greatest part, belonged to the offer- 
er himself, and was to be eaten by him- 



self and his family and friends, if cere- 
monially clean, as a social and hospita- 
ble meal. If the Peace-offering were 
of the eucharistic class, it was to be " 
eaten the same day it was offered, and 
none of it was to be left until the morn- 
ing. But if the sacrifice of the offering 
were a vow or a voluntary offering, part 
of it might be eaten on the day on 
which it was offered, and part of it on 
the next day ; but if any of it remained 
unto the third day, that part must not 
be eaten, but must be burnt with fire. 
The reason of the difference in the two 
cases is perhaps this : the tribute of 
love and gratitude was far more pleas- 
ing to God, as arguing a more heavenly 
frame of mind. In consequence of its 
superior excellence the sacrifice that 
was offered as a thanksgiving must be 
eaten on the same day j whereas the 
sacrifice offered as a vow or voluntary 
offering might, being less holy and ac- 
ceptable, be eaten also on the second 
day. 

As to the occasions on which the 
Peace-ofterings were presented, some 
of them were fixed by divine appoint- 
ment, and some were altogether op- 
tional. The fixed occasions were at 
the consecration of the priests, Ex. 29. 
28 J at the expiration of the Nazarite's 
vow, Num. 6. 14 ; at the dedication of 
the tabernacle and temple, Num. 7. 17 ; 
and at the feast of first- fruits, Lev. 23. 
19. In addition to these, the people 
were at liberty to offer them whenever 
a sense of gratitude or of need inclined 
them to it. It is to occasions of this 
kind that the directions in the present 
chapter mainly have respect. 

Having thus explained the nature of 
the Peace-offering, and the various rites 
and ceremonies connected with it, it 
remains to advert briefly to the moral 
lessons which it was calculated to im- 
part. And in the outset we may re- 
mark, that the rendering of the original 
adopted in our version suggests the idea 
of a pacifying effect as wrought by this 
species of sacrifice, which is to be attrib- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER III. 



33 



CHAPTER m. 

AND if his oblation Z>e a a sacri- 
fice of peace-oflfering, if he 

ach. 7. 11, 29. and 22. 21. 

uted rather to the other class of offer- 
ings, whose scope was more distinctly 
expiatory. The word peace has a dif- 
ferent shade of meaning in the Hebrew 
fronn what it has in our language. With 
us it suggests most naturally and legiti- 
mately the idea of reconciliation, the 
bringing into concord contending par- 
ties j — an idea which is more properly 
to be associated with the effects of the 
stated burnt-offering, or the occasional 
sin and trespass-offering. In the He- 
brew the import of prosperity^ of wel- 
fare, is predominant to the enjoyment 
or the petition of which this offering 
was especially appointed. The idea of 
grateful acknowledgment therefore is 
the leading idea which it is calculated 
to suggest. But with what expressive 
ceremonies was this service marked ! 
How strongly would it tend to infuse 
the spirit of a son and of a friend into 
the heart of the worshipper. How em- 
phatically would he be reminded of the 
blessed privileges which he enjoyed 
through his sacrifice. Partaking of the 
same viands was ever considered as the 
bond and proof of friendship and peace j 
and here the Lord, his priests, and the 
offerer himself, all partook of the same 
offerings. They sat down together as 
it were at the same table. In this rite 
accordingly the Jev/ would read a happy 
assurance of the divine favor towards 
him. As he feasted with his family 
and friends on the portion assigned him 
from the altar, he would enjoy a peace 
in his own soul from this instituted 
token of reconciliation and friendship. 
The w^hole ceremony was eminently 
calculated to produce all the emotions 
appropriate to his condition. As he 
brought his offering to the altar, he 
would think of the great mercy and 
condescension of God in thus providing 
a way of acceptance for him, and ad- 



offer it of the herd, whether it he 
a male or female ; he shall offer it 
^without blemish before the Lord. 



o ch. 1. 3. 



mi t ting him to his own friendship and 
love. He w^ould feel deep abasement 
for the alienation and disaffection which 
appeared in his own heart. As he laid 
his hand on the animal's head, and as 
he saw its blood streaming at his feet, 
he would think of his own utter unwor- 
thiness to appear before God, and he 
would be affected to think that he owed 
all his permission to approach him to 
the sufferings of another in his stead. 
As he saw the smoke of the fat ascend 
to heaven, he w^ould rejoice in this ac- 
ceptance of his offering. When he 
looked upon the waved breast and the 
uplifted shoulder, he Vv^ould be thankful 
for the ministry of the appointed serv- 
ants of the Most High, and when he 
retired from the ceremony he w^ould go 
on his way rejoicing that the Lord had 
accepted him in his work, and would 
eat his food with all the warmest emo- 
tions of gratitude, affiance, and love. 
Such would be the legitimxate influence 
of a ceremony of this nature upon the 
heart of every pious Jew. It would be 
one of his most privileged feasts, though 
but a private one, and would throw a 
peaceful and happy frame over the 
whole soul. Thus the evangelical doc- 
trines were presented to him, and all 
those right feelings towards God, which 
are so powerfully called forth by the 
gospel, were in a measure according 
with his light experienced by a Jew. 

The Peace-offering of the Herd. 

1 If his oblation. Heb. 1512 '^p korha- 
no, his korhan or gift, as usual in this 
connection wherever ' offering ' or 
^ oblation ' occurs in our version. Gr. 

TO ScjpOV aVTOV TM l^VpKO, hlS gift tO thC 

Lord. In like manner Vv^e find ' korban ' 
explained as a gift by the Evangelist, 

Mark 7. 11. IT Male or female. In 

this respect the peace-offering differed 



34 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



2 And che shall lay his hand upon 
the head of his offering, and kill it 
at the door of the tabernacle of the 
congregation : and Aaron's sons 
the priests shall sprinkle the blood 
upon the altar round about. 

3 And he shall offer of the sacri- 
fice of the peace-offering, an offer- 
ing made by fire unto the Lord ; 
dthe fat that covereth the inwards, 

c ch. 1. 4, 5. Exod. 29. 10. ^ Exod. 29. 
13,22. ch. 4. 8, 9. 



from the holocaust^ or whole 



in which a male 



burnt- 
only was 



offering, 
allowed. 

2. Shall lay his hand. The imposi- 
tion of hands in this case differed from 
the same ceremony in the sacrifice of 
the holocaust in this, that over the head 
of the peace-offering there was no con- 
fession of sins, but merely the uttering 

of praise and supplication to God. 

i:[ And kill it at the door, ^c. That is 
the priest or some other Levite shall 
kill it. So also v. 8. See note on Lev. 
1.5. As this offering belonged to what 
were termed the lesser or lighter holy 
things, it was not required to be offered, 
like the burnt- offering or the sin-offer- 
ing, on the north side of the altar, but 
in any place of the court. Lev. 1. 11. 

IT And Aaron^s sons shall sprinkle. 

This was to be done according to the 
manner prescribed, Lev. 1.5. ' For the 
burnt-offering,' says Maimonides, ' the 
trespass-offering, and the peace-offering, 
the sprinkling of the blood of these 
three upon the altar was ever alike.' 
It was obviously a type of the sprink- 
ling of Christ's blood, whereby we, our 
words and works are sanctified before 
God. 1 Pet. 1.2, Heb. 12. 14. 

3. Shall offer of the sacrifice. Heb. 
hit>2 mizzeba'h. That is, part of the 
peace-offering 5 for of this sacrifice one 
part, viz. the fat pieces, the kidneys, 
the caul, &c., was to be burnt 5 a second, 
consisting of the breast and the right 
shoulder, was reserved for the priest ; 
while all the remainder was appropriat- 



and all the fat that is upon the in- 
Avards, 

4 And the two kidneys, and the 
fat that is on them, which is by the 
flanks, and the caul above the liv- 
er, with the kidneys, it shall he 
take away. 

5 And Aaron's sons eshall burn it 
on the altar, upon the burnt-sacri- 
fice, which is upon the wood, that 

e ch. 6. 12. Exod. 29. 13. 

ed to the offerer, to be eaten by him, his 
family and friends, in a sacrificial feast. 

IT The fat that covereth the inwards. 

Frequently termed with us ' the suet.' 
This was always burned upon the altar, 
and would naturally serve to feed the 
fire. See a fuller explanation in the 
Note on Ex. 29. 13. The design of this 
part of the ceremony may be understood 
in either of the ways following. (1.) As 
the ' fat ' of any thing is sometimes but 
another name for its best or choicest 
part (see Note on Gen. 4. 4), and as the 
' fat ' was deemed the most valuable 
part of the animal, it was offered in 
preference to all other parts, implying 
that the best of every thing was to be 
offered to God. (2.) As, however, the 
term is used in other cases to denote the 
dullness, hardness, and unbelief of the 
heart, Ps. 119. 70. Acts 28. 27, it may 
here signify the consuming of our cor- 
ruptions by the fire of the Holy Spirit. 
The ' kidneys ' also, the supposed seat 
of some of the strongest of the sensual 
propensities, were burnt probably to 
teach the duty of the mortification of 
our members which are upon earth, for- 
nication, uncleanness, inordinate affec- 
tion, &c. Col. 3. 5 

4. The caul above the liver. See note 

on Ex. 29. 13. IT Which is by the 

flanks. Heb. D^^DID keselim, loins. 
Gr. and Chal. ' Which is on the thighs.' 
Comp. Job 15. 27, ' He covereth his face 
with his fatness, and maketh collops of 
fat on his flanks. CjO'D kesel.y 

5. Upon the burnt-sacrifice. That is, 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER III. 



35 



is on the fire : it is an offering 
made by fire, of a sweet savour 
unto the Lord. 

6 If And if his offering for a sa- 
crifice of peace-offering unto the 
Lord be of the flock, male or fe- 
male ; fhe shall offer it without 
blemish. 

7 If he offer a lamb for his offer- 
ing, then shall he offer it before 
the Lord. 

8 And he shall lay his hand upon 

f ver. 1, &c. 

in addition to the burnt-oflfering, laying 
it on the altar after the daily offering 
of the lamb, which always had the pre- 
cedency. 

The Peace-offering of the Flock. — 1. A 
Lamb. 

6. If his offering he of the flock. 

That is, of sheep or goats, which 
are both included under the term flock. 
* Peace-offerings,' says Maimonides, 
^are brought of sheep, of goats, and of 
beeves, male or female, and great or 
small ; but no fowl is brought for a 
peace-oflfering.' The reason of this ex- 
ception was that fowls had not iat 
enough to be burnt upon the altar. 

9. The whole rump. Heb. tl^^^tl 
niD^^ri hclalyah temimahj the perfect or 
entire tail. ' Dr. Boothroyd renders, 
more distinctly : — ' The large fat tail 
entire, taken off close to the rump.' It 
might seem extraordmary that the tail 
of a sheep (only of a sheep) should be 
pointed out with so much care as a suit- 
able offering upon God's altar, were it 
not distinctly understood what sheep 
and what tail is intended. The direc- 
tion indicates that the fat-tailed species 
were usually offered in sacrifice, if the 
flocks of the Hebrews were not wholly 
composed of them. This species is 
particularly abundant in Syria and Pal- 
estine, equalling or outnumbering the 
common Bedouin species. Even the 
latter, although in other respects much 



the head of his offering, and kill it 
before the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation : and Aaron's sons shall 
sprinkle the blood thereof round 
about upon the altar. 

9 And he shall offer of the sacri- 
fice of the peace-offering an offer- 
ing made by fire unto the Lord : 
the fat thereof, and the whole 
rump, (it shall he take off hard by 
the back-bone ;) and the fat that 
covereth the inwards, and all the 
fat that is upon the inwards, 

resembling the common English sheep, 
is distinguished by a larger and thicker 
tail than any British species possesses. 
But the tail of the species peculiarly 
called ' fat-tailed,' seems to exceed all 
reasonable bounds, and has attracted 
the attention of all travelers from the 
times of Herodotus to our own. These 
tails, or rather tails loaded on each side 
with enormous masses of fat, are often 
one-fourth the weight of the whole car- 
cass, when divested of the head, intes- 
tines, and skin. The tails seem to at- 
tain the largest size in the countries 
with which the Hebrews were most 
conversant ; for in countries more east- 
ward we never saw them quite so large 
as the largest of those described by Dr. 
Russell in his ^ Natural History of 
Aleppo.' He says that a common 
sheep of this sort weighs, without the 
offal, sixty or seventy pounds, of which 
the tail usually weighs fifty or upwards ; 
but he adds, that such as are of the 
largest breed and have been fattened, 
will sometimes weigh 150 lbs., the tails 
being 50 lbs. These last very large 
sheep are kept in yards where they are 
in no danger of injuring their tails ; but 
in some other places where they feed 
in the fields, the shepherds sometimes 
afl5x a thin piece of board to the under 
part of the tail, to prevent its being torn 
by bushes and thickets, as it is not 
covered underneath with thick wool 
like the upper part. Sometimes the 



36 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



1 And the two kidneys, and the 
fat that is upon them, which is 
by the flanks, and the caul above 
the liver, with the kidneys, it shall 
he take away. 

11 And the priest shall burn it 
upon the altar : it is gthe food of 
the offering made by fire unto the 
Lord. 

12 IT And if his offering be a 
goat, then ^he shall offer it before 
the Lord. 

13 And he shall lay his hand upon 
the head of it, and kill it before the 
tabernacle of the congregation : 
and the sons of Aaron shall sprin- 
kle the blood thereof upon the 
altar round about. 

] 4 And he shall offer thereof his 



s See ch. 21. 6, 8, 17, 21, 22. and 22. 25. 
Ezek. 44. 7. Mai. 1. 7, 12. h ygr. 1. 7- &c. 



board is furnished with small wheels, 
to enable the sheep to drag it along the 
more easily. The mutton of these 
sheep is very good, and the fat of the 
tail is the most grateful animal fat the 
writer ever tasted. It is rich and mar- 
rowy, and is never eaten alone, but is 
mixed up in many dishes with lean 
meat, and is in various ways employed 
as a substitute for butter and oil. The 
boiled rice, is 



standing Oriental dish, 
peculiarly palatable when lubricated 
with fat from the tail of this remarka- 
ble species of sheep. Viewed in its 
various applications, the tail is an ar- 
ticle of great use and delicacy, and 
could be no unworthy offering.' — Pict, 
Bib. 

11. It is the food of the offering, 8fC. 
We have before remarked, in speaking 
of the general object of the altar, that 
the sacrifices offered upon it were ac- 
counted, in a sense, the provisions of 
God^s table, the viands upon which he 
feasted. See Mai. 1. 12. Such offer- 
ings are here called his 'bread,' or 
' food,' and the phraseology occurs also 
Num. 28. 2 Ezek. 44. 7, and in Lev. 21. 



offering, even an offering made by 
fire unto the Lord; the fat that 
covereth the inwards, and all the 
fat that is upon the inwards, 

15 And the two kidneys, and the 
fat that is upon them, which is by 
the flanks, and the caul above the 
liver, with the kidneys, it shall he 
take away. 

16 And the priest shall burn them 
upon the altar : it is the food of 
the offering made by fire for a sweet 
savour : iall the fat is the Lord's. 

17 It shall be a ^perpetual statute 
for your generations throughout all 
your dwellings, that ye eat neither 
ifat nor ^blood. 

i ch. 7. 23, 25. 1 Sam. 2. 15. 2 Chron. 7. 
7. k ch. 6. 18. and 7. 36. and 17. 7. and 23. 
14. 1 ver. 16. compare with Deut. 32. 14. 
Neh. 8. 10. ^ Gen. 9. 4. ch. 7. 23, 26 and 
17. 10, 14. Deut. 12. 16. 1 Sam. 14". 33. 
Ezek- 44. 7, 15. 

6, 8, 17, the priests who burnt them are 
expressly said to offer ^ the bread of 
their God.' The use of this language 
represented in a striking manner the 
fact that God dwelt, and, as it were, 
kept house among them, and that those 
who partook with him of these sacri- 
fices, were entertained as guests at his 
table. 

The Peace-offering of the Flock. — 2. A 
Goat. 

12. If his offering he a goat. The 
law concerning this offering coincides 
entirely with the preceding respecting 
the lamb, except in what relates to the 
rump or tail, so that this section requires 
very little commentary. 

14. He shall offer thereof. That is, 
a part of it, the part which he imme- 
diately goes on to specify, viz. the fat, 
the kidneys, the caul, &c. 

17. That ye eat neither fat nor blood. 
This prohibition respecting the eating 
of fat, is to be understood of the fat of 
such animals as were offered to God in 
sacrifice, and not of others, although the 
Jews, we believe, interpret it of all fat. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IV. 



37 



without exception. But the contrary is 
to be gathered from Lev. 7. 2, ' Ye shall 
eat of no manner of fat of ox, or of 
sheep, or of goat ;' implying that the 
fat of other animals might be eaten. 
As to blood, however, the probability is, 
although the Rabbinical writers main- 
tain that that of locusts, fishes, &c. was 
lawful, that it was intended to be uni- 
versally forbidden. The prohibition in 
Gen. 9. 4, is absolute and unqualified ; 
' Flesh with the blood thereof shall ye 
not eat.' The reasons of the prohibition 
doubtless were, (1.) To put a difference 
between the chosen people and Gentile 
idolaters, who used to. drink the blood 
of their sacrifices ; Ps. 16. 4, ^ Their 
sorrows shall be multiplied that hasten 
after another God : their drink-offer- 
ings of blood will I not ofier.' (2.) To 
restrain any tendency to the acquisition 
of a cruel and sanguinary disposition. 
(3.) To inspire respect and reverence 
for that which w^as intended to represent 
the precious blood of Christ, in which 
the virtue of his atonement was to con- 
sist. 

Remarks.— (1.) As the highest re- 
compense which God requires for his 
benefits towards us is the tribute of a 
grateful heart, he that withholds this 
clearly proves himself unworthy of the 
least of heaven's mercies. 

(1.) A cordial thank-offering to God 
should ever follow the attainment of 
anj^ lawful object upon which our hearts 
have been set. 

(2.) How kindly are we exempted 
from the legal burdens of the Jews i If 
they wished to express their humilia- 
tion or gratitude, it w^as at the expense 
of apart of their property, yielded up 
to God by way of sacrifice. No such 
necessity is imposed upon us. God 
hath not made us ' to serve with an 
offering, nor wearied us with incense.' 
It is the offering of a free heart, or of a 
^ broken and contrite spirit/ that he 
desires of us, and that he will accept in 
preference to ^ the cattle upon a thou- 



sand hills.' All that remains for us is 
to say, ' Accept, I beseech thee, the 
free-will offerings of my mouth. ^ If 
we withhold these, well may we fear 
that every beast that was ever slaugh- 
tered on these occasions, and every por- 
tion ever offered, will appear in judg- 
ment against us, to condemn our ingra- 
titude and obduracy 1 i 
(5.) ' Shall burn it on the altar, upon 
the burnt-sacrifice.' The Peace-offer- " 
ing, whether presented in a way of 
thanksgiving or supplication, equally 
began with a sacrifice in the way of 
atonement. Thus, whatever be the 
frame of our minds, and whatever ser- 
vice we render unto God, we are inva- 
riably to fix our thoughts on the atone- 
ment of Christ, as the only means 
whereby our persons or our services can 
find acceptance w4th God. 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE SIN-OFI*ERING. 

The Jewish law prescribed two kinds 
of piacular sacrifices distinguished in 
our language by the appellations Sm- 
offering and Trespass-offering — terms 
which, though not adequately express- 
ing the force of the original words, we 
are obliged to retain for the want of 
better. The original for Sin-offering 
is n^t^n hattdh, or Jn^t^n hattdthj the 
strict rendering of which is sin, but 
which is by metaphorical usage em- 
ployed to denote a sin-offering. So in 
like manner tlZJS^ ashdm rendered tres- 
pass-offering properly and primarily 
signifies trespass. In accordance with 
this usage the apostle, 2 Cor. 5. 21, says 
God ' made him (Christ) to be sin 
{aixapTiav a siu-offering) for us, who 
knew no sin, that we might be made 
the righteousness of God.' The Gr. 
word here used by the apostle is the 
same by which the Septuagint in more 
than eighty places in the Pentateuch 
translate the Heb. word H&^t:)! hattdh, 
sin, which in all these places our Eng- 
lish version renders sin-offering. Yet 



.38 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



it is at the same time proper to observe 
that the term may be taken in this con- 
nexion as an abstract for the concrete, 
and simply imply that God treated the 
Savior as if he were a sinner. 

The distinction of these two kinds of 
offerings is exceedingly difficult to be 
determined. In Lev. 5. 5, 6, the terms 
are used as signifying precisely the 
same thing, and in the 11th and 12th 
verses the Trespass-offering is thrice 
mentioned as a Sin-offering. The ex- 
planation suggested by Michaelis, Jahn, 
Gesenius, and others, viz. that sin-offer- 
ings were presented for offences of 
commission^ and Trespass-offerings for 
those of omission^ has of late perhaps 
been most generally received. Yet it 
fails on examination to yield entire 
conviction ; for some offences mentioned 
among trespasses, (as Lev. 5. 2,3.) are 
as much of a positive nature, as any of 
the transgressions indicated in a general 
way as requiring to be expiated by 
Sin-offerings j and the very occasion of 
a Trespass-offering (Lev. 5. 17-19.) is 
described in language w^hichmost strict- 
ly applies to d, positive violation of law. 
Nor can we well make the distinction 
consist in the offence having been com- 
mitted unawares in the one case, and 
not in the other j for if the person 
bound to present a Sin-offering, is uni- 
formly described as one who has ' sin- 
ned through ignorance,' the same too is 
the character of transgressions men- 
tioned in connexion with Trespass-of- 
ferings, Lev. 5. 2, 3, 15. On the whole, 
whatever the distinction was, it does 
not seem to have been of much import- 
ance 5 and Winer, (Realworterbuch), 
after a pretty full discussion of the sub- 
ject, which is to be found translated in 
J. P. Smith's ' Discourses on the Sa- 
crifice and Priesthood of Christ,' re- 
marks, that as none of the previous so- 
lutions are satisfactory, and ' as in the 
statements of the law itself nothing is 
contained that can in any measure con- 
duct us safely to a determination upon 
the difference between the Sin-offering 



and the Trespass-offering, it seems best 
entirely to renounce making a distinc- 
tion' By which he probably does not 
mean that there was no distinction, but 
that at this day it is very difficult, if 
not impossible, to discover it. 

The difficulty lies in great measure in 
in this, that the Sin-offering seems to 
have respect to a lighter species of sin^ 
and yet to require the more solemn 
offering 3 whilst the Trespass-offering 
relates to considerably heavier offences, 
and yet admits of an easier method of 
obtaining forgiveness. This is evident 
from the fact, that in the Trespass- 
offering pigeons or turtle-doves might 
be offered, or in case of extreme poverty 
a measure of flour 5 but in the Sm-offer- 
ing no such abatement or commutation 
was allowed. But then there were 
some peculiarities attaching to the 
Trespass-offering which may perhaps 
afford a solution to this apparent anom- 
aly, and which we shall advert to after 
stating the principal points of differ- 
ence between the two. (1.) They dif- 
fered in the occasions on which they 
were offered. The Sin-offerings, it ap- 
pears, Avere presented on account of 
something done amiss through igno- 
rance or infirmity, while the Tres- 
pass-offering would seem rather to have 
been for sins committed through inad- 
vertence, or the power of temptation, and 
under circumstances which appear to 
admit of less apology than the pre- 
ceding. Among the latter were sins of 
great enormity, such as violence, fraud, 
lying, and even perjury itself. Lev. 5. 
1, 4, — 6. 2, 3. There must of course be 
very different degrees of criminality in 
these sins, according to the degree of 
information the person possessed, and 
the degree of conviction against which 
he acted. It might be that even in these 
things the person had sinned through 
ignorance only j but whatever circum- 
stances there might be to extenuate or 
aggravate his crime, the Trespass- offer- 
ing was the appointed means whereby 
he was to obtain mercy and forgiveneso. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IV. 



S9 



(2.) They differed in jLhe circumstances 
attending them. In the Sin-offering 
there was a particular respect to the 
rank and quality of the offender. If he 
were a priest, he was to offer a bullock j 
which was also the appointed offering 
for the whole congregation. If he were 
a ruler or magistrate, he must offer a 
kidj a male ; but if he were a common 
individual, a female kid or lamb would 
suffice. In the Trespass-offering, no 
mention is made of a. bullock for any 
one, but only of a female kid or lamb, 
of turtle-doves or young pigeons, or in 
the event of a person's not being able 
to afford them, he might offer about five 
pints of flour, which would be accepted 
in their stead, Lev. 5. 6, 7, 11. This is 
the excepted case to which Paul refers 
when he says, Heb. 9. 22, * Almost all 
things are by the law purged with blood.' 
Now thus far it does appear that the 
heavier sins w^ere to be atoned for by 
the lighter sacrifices ; but then there 
were three things required in the Tres- 
pass-offering which had no place in the 
Sin-offering, viz. : confession of the 
crime, restitution of the property, and 
compensation for the injury. Suppose 
a person had ' robbed God ' by keeping 
back a part of his tithes, whether inten- 
tionally or not, he must, as soon as it 
was discovered, present his offering, 
confess his fault, restore what he had 
unjustly taken, and add one fifth more 
of its value, as a compensation of the 
injury he had done. Lev, 5. 5. — 6. 5. 
The same process was to take place if 
by fraud or violence he had injured a 
man, Num. 5. 6-8. This gives a decided 
preponderance to the Trespass-offering, 
and shows that the means used for the 
expiation of different offences bore a 
just proportion to the quality of those 
offences. We do not affirm that this 
observation clears up all the difiiculty 
respecting the distinction of the two 
kinds of offerings, but that it removes 
some part of it we think there can be no 
doubt. 



The Sin-ofierings were of two kinds, 
the greater and the Zess, The greater 
were offered, (1) When the high-priest 
had committed an offence, and thereby 
brought guilt upon the whole nation. 
In this case he was required to bring 
the greatest of all the sacrifices, a young 
bullock, because he was the least ex- 
cusable of all men if he knew not the 
law of God, or heedlessly did any 
thing contrary to it. This victim he 
was to bring to the door of the taberna- 
cle, lay his hand upon its head, and kill 
it before the Lord. A part of the blood 
was then jetted with his finger seven 
times towards the separating veil or 
curtain of the sanctuary, a part of it 
was sprinkled on the altar of incense, 
and the remainder poured out on the 
ground at the foot of the altar of burnt- 
ofierings. The inward fat was then to 
be burnt upon the altar, but the skin 
and all the remaining parts were to be 
carried out and burnt without the gates 
of the camp or city. (2.) When the 
whole nation had committed an offence 
through ignorance, and afterwards re- 
pented. In this case the offering was 
the same, a young bullock without 
blemish, upon which the elders of the 
congregation were to lay their hands, 
and then the victim was to be slain, and 
the same ceremonies used in the dis- 
posal of the blood, as in the similar 
offering of the priest. (3.) On the 
great day of atonement for the high- 
priest and the nation. The ceremonies, 
which were more numerous and impos- 
ing than usual, will be detailed in the 
notes on the 16th ch., where we have 
treated at full length of the two-fold 
ordinance of the sacrificial and the 
scape goat. 

The lesser kind of Sin-offerings were 
brought in the following cases. (L) 
When a magistrate or ruler committed 
an offence through error, w^hich after- 
wards came to his knowledge. His 
sacrifice was then to be a kid of the 
goats without blemish, whose blood 



40 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



CHAPTER IV. 
\ ND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
■^ ses, saying, 
2 Speak unto the children of Is- 



was partly smeared upon the altar, and 
partly poured upon the ground. The 
fat pieces only came to the altar ; the 
rest fell to the priest. Lev. 4. 22-26. 
(2.) When a private person sinned 
through ignorance. The sacrifice pre- 
scribed was a ewe or a female kid. 
(3.) When a woman was purified from 
a long-continued hemorrhage ; or, after 
child-birth, had reached the time of 
purification. Lev. 12. 6, 8.— 15. 25-30. 
(4.) When one had a running issue, as 
mentioned Lev. 15. 2, 14, 15. (5.) When 
a Nazarite had touched a corpse, or the 
time of his vow was completed. Num. 
6. 10, 14. (6.) On the consecration of 
a priest or Levite. Lev. 9. 23. Num. 
8. 8, 12. (7.) On the purification of a 
leper. Lev. 14. 19-31. The other de- 
tails of the ofiering will be noticed as 
we proceed. 

In contemplating the institution of 
the Sin-ofiering, the strongest im.pres- 
sion perhaps which we receive from it is 
that of guilt and responsibility attach- 
ing, in the sight of God, to sins of in- 
firmity and ignorance ; for it is to such 
that it mainly has respect. We are 
prone to imagine that an offence com- 
mitted unintentionally or unawares, 
cannot incur the charge of guilt. Men 
do not scruple to plead their ignorance, 
their infirmities, their natural and ha- 
bitual propensities in excuse for their 
misdeeds. But the law of God deter- 
mines otherwise. It enjoins an onerous 
ceremony for the expiation of sins un- 
consciously committed. The sin, it is 
true, is not so great as if it were done 
knowingly, wilfully, and presumptuous- 
ly ; yet still it is sin, and as such needs 
an atonement. Without the shedding 
of blood there was no remission. At 
the same time we are not to lose sight 
of the consolation which flows through 



rael, saying, aff a soul shall sin 
through ignorance against any of 



a ch. 5. 15, 17. Nnm. 
14. 27. Ps 19. 12. 



15. 22. &c. 1 Sam. 



this typical ordinance to the bosom of 
the penitent believer. The language 
of the Apostle, Heb. 13. 1 1-13, makes it 
evident that the Sin-offering pointed 
directly to Christ, through whose effi- 
cacious atonement all his sins, whether 
of greater or less aggravation, are can- 
celled and abolished. It is those daily 
infirmities, those sins unconsented to, 
and yet committed ; those faults too 
covert for detection, or too late detect- 
ed ; it is they that constitute his daily 
struggles, and wage within him an un- 
ceasing warfare. And when he has 
seen the sins of his wilful alienation 
borne away by the atoning sacrifice, 
these cleaving vestiges of a corrupt 
nature will often vex him with painful 
fears, lest there should still be a demand 
of wrath against him. How appropri- 
ate then is this exhibition of a continual 
offering for our continual need I ' He 
that knew no sin was made sin (a sin- 
offering) for us.' Here we have par- 
don ; not once, to cancel the past debt 
and begin on a new score ; but pardon 
daily, hourly renewed, as often as the 
Sin-offering is pleaded before the Fa- 
ther, is brought in faith, and laid upon 
the altar before the Lord. W^e do no- 
thing well. If we pray, it is with cold 
and wandering thoughts ; if we hear, it 
is with distracted and forgetful minds j 
we are continually surprised, continually 
overtaken, continually turned aside by 
the current of temptation, that runs so 
strong against us, when perhaps we 
cannot convict ourselves of one indulged, 
deliberate sin. Therefore did the God 
of mercies ordain this peculiar institu- 
tion, prefiguring to them of old the 
divine oblation to be once offered, but 
forever efficacious, for the pardon of this 
and every kind of guilt. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IV. 



41 



the commandments of the Lord 
concerning things which ought 
not to be done, and shall do against 
any of them: 



1. The Sin-offermg for the Anointed 
Priest. 
2. Shall sin through ignorance against 
any of the commandments. Heb. lljti'2 

niir?2 5::^ nri^-iL^n i^t:nn ^^ nephesh 

ki tehetd bishgdgdh mikkol mitzvoth 
a soul when it shall sin through inad- 
vertently erring from any of the com- 
mandments. The true construction is, 
not ' sinning against/ but ' erring from/ 
as the phraseology in the original is in 
effect the same with that in Ps. 119. 10. 
' Let me not wander from ('^'2^'2jt] "^^ 

al tashgeni) thy commandments.' 

H Through ignorance J i.e. unadvisedly, 
unwittingly, unawares. The Heb. H^^lilJ 
shegdgdhj here used, comes from n^tu 
shdgdhj to go astray, to err, to trans- 
gress through mistake, ignorance, or 
inadvertency. In the Greek it is some- 
times rendered by ayvoia ignorance, but 
here, and frequently elsewhere, by 
aKovatoig unwillingly, the exact oppo- 
site to £Kov(no)5 willingly or wilfully, 
occurring Heb. 10. 26, and opposite also 
to what the law. Num. 15. 57, 30, terms 
sinning with a high hand, or presump- 
tuously. The import of the term is 
fully disclosed. Num. 35. 11, where 
mention is made of ' killing a person 
at unawares f Heb. f\J^T22 shegdgdh, 
by error, unwittingly, which, in the 
parallel passage, Deut. 19. 14, is ex- 
pressed by ig-noranfZy, or literally, with- 
out knowledge ; both which terms, for 
greater explicitness, are joined together 
in Josh. 20. 3, ' The slayer that killeth 
any person unawares (n^T2^^ bishgd- 
gdh, by error), and unwittingly (i. e. 
without knowledge),' which is also 
opposed to a ' lying in wait,' i. e. with 
a set purpose and intention to killj 
Deut. 19. 11. Ex. 21. 13. The Apos- 
tle, Heb. 9. 7, denominates such sins 
ayvorjtxaTa ignorances, or ignorant tres- 
4* 



3 i^If the priest that is anointed 
do sin according to the sin of the 



t ch. 8. 12. 



passes, more fully explained, Heb. 5. 3. 
by two distinct words, where he speaks 
of the duty of priests ' to have compas- 
sion on the ignorant, and on them that 
are out of the way.'' These ignorances 
or errors therefore occurred when any 
one, through not knowing, or forgetting, 
or not duly heeding the law, and im- 
pelled rather by a casual infirmity, than 
by a settled intention, committed some 
foul act which God had forbidden. la 
such cases, as soon as the transgression 
came to the knowledge of the offender, 
he was required to offer the sacrifice 
here prescribed j and not to think that 
ignorance or inadvertency was an ex- 
cuse for his sin. But he, on the other 
hand, who sinned presumptuously, and 
with an avowed contempt of the law 
and the iaw-maker, was to be cut off, 
and there remained no more sacrifice for 

the sin, Heb. 10. 2o, 27. IT And shall 

do against any of them. Heb. ntD5^1 
n!'n^ iTiHi^JO vedsdh meahath mehennah, 
shall do of (any) one of them. Gr. 
TxoiriGr] kv tl a-' avrodv, shall do any One 
thing of them. The phrase ' do against' 
does not perhaps materially vary from 
a correct rendering, but the obvious 
idea of the original is the doing of 
something which ought not to be done. 
The Jewish writers insist on the fol- 
lowing circumstances relative to the 
sin mentioned in the text. (1.) Its 
being committed through ignorance, or 
mistake, or involuntarily. (2.) Its 
being against some negative command. 
(3.) Its including facts, not words or 
thoughts^ as appears from the expres- 
sion, ' and shalHo against any of them.' 
(4.) Its consisting of such facts as, if 
perpetrated willingly , would subject the 
offender to a tTSZ kereth, or capital 
cutting off. 

3. The priest that is anointed. That 
is, the High Priest; as rendered both in 



42 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



people ; then let him bring for his 
sin which he hath sinned, ca young 
bullock without blemish unto the 
LoKD for a sin-offering. 

4 And he shall bring the bullock 
<iunto the door of the tabernacle of 

c ch. 9. 2. ti ch. 1. 3, 4. 

the Gr. and Chal. ; for the High Priest 
only was, in after times, thus honored. 
Lev.,21.10. 16.32. Ex. 29. 29. Thus, 
as the apostle says, ' The law made 
those high priests who had infirmity, 
and w^ho needed daily to ofier up sacri- 
fices, first, for their own sins, and then 
for the people's j' but our High Priest, 
Christ Jesus, was holy, harmless, unde- 
filed, and separate from sinners, and 
made higher than the heavens. — - 
^ Sin according to the sin of the people. 
Heb. t5>n lri)2^}:<i leashmath hdcim^ to 
the guilt of the people, i. e. so as to 
cause the people to transgress and bring 
guilt upon themselves, by emboldening 
them in iniquity by his pernicious ex- 
ample, or involving them, in virtue of 
the intimate relation subsisting between 
priest and people, in the consequences 
of his guih. Thus 1 Chron.21. 3, ' Why 
then doth my Lord require this thing ? 
Why will he bring a cause of trespass 
(n>3l2J55<i leashmah) to Israel V where 
the word rendered * cause of trespass,' 
is the same with that occurring here, and 
rendered < sin.' Gr. tov tov \aov auapreiv 
so that the people sin. Vulg. ^ delinquere 
faciens populum,' so as to make the 
people to offend. Chazkuni, a Jewish 
commentator, explains it thus : ' To 
make the people guilty, in that he hath 
taught and permitted them to do a thing 

forbidden.' IF A young bullock. Heb. 

*1p!2 "p, 'IS par ben bdkdr, a young 
bullock, by which is meant one little 
larger than a calf. It would almost 
seem that there was ground for the re- 
mark made by some, that in great 
offences the sacrifices were compara- 
tively small, lest it should be imagined 
that pardon was obtained by the value 



the congregation before the Lord ; 
and shall lay his hand upon the 
bullock's head, and kill the bullock 
before the Lord. 

5 And the priest that is anointed 
eshall take of the bullock's blood, 

e ch. 10. 14. Numb. 19. 4. 



of the offering. Here the word em- 
ployed is 'n^ par, properly a calf, while 
the victim in the peace-ofTcring was 
TllD shor, an ox, though rendered less 

strictly in our version a bullock. 

IT Let him bring for his sin for a 

sin-offering. The same original word 
«li:<LOn hattah, sin, is used in both cases. 
This, as we already remarked, is the 
name both for sin and the sin-offering ; 
as the word piaculum was among the 
heathen, which signified both a great 
crime and the expiatory sacrifice for it. 
See Rom. 8. 3. 2 Cor. 5. 21, where the 
word a^anria sin, is used in the same 
manner. 

4. Shall lay his hands, ^-c. In the 
trespass-offering and other sacrifices of 
this nature, confession was joined with 
the imposition of hands ; but in the sin- 
ofiering it is not mentioned, though 
some commentators have supposed it 
was implied. But we prefer to adhere 
to the simple letter of the record. But 
that the offering was, or ought to have 
been made in a penitent, believing, and 
imploring frame of spirit, there can be 
no doubt. ' Neither reconciliation-day 
(Lev. 16.), nor sin-offering, nor tres- 
pass-offering do make atonement, sav- 
ing for them that repent and believe in 
their atonement.' — Maimonides. An- 
other of the Jewish writers (Nitzachon, 
p. 11) observes, ^ When a man sacrificed 
a beast he was to think, ' I am more a 
beast than this present ; for I have sin- 
ned, and for the sins which I have com- 
mitted, I offer this animal ; though it 
were more just that he who sinned 
should suffer death than this beast.' 
Wherefore by this sacrifice a man was 
led to begin his repentance.' 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IV. 



43 



and bring it to the tabernacle of 
the congregation : 

6 And the priest shall dip his fin- 
ger in the blood, and sprinkle of 
the blood seven times before the 
LoED, before the vail of the sanc- 
tuary. 

7 And the priest shall fput some 
of the blood upon the horns of the 
altar of sweet incense before the 
Lord, which is in the tabernacle 
of the congregation ; and shall 
pour gall the blood of the bullock 
at the bottom of the altar of the 
burnt-offering, which is at the door 
of the tabernacle of the congrega- 
tion. 

8 And he shall take off from it 

f ch. 8. 15, and 9. 9, and 16. 18. s ch. 5. 9. 

5. And bring it to the tabernacle of 
the congregation. By which is meant 
that it should be brought into the very 
sanctuary, as appears from what fol- 
lows. The preposition "^H^ el, might 
indeed properly have been rendered 
into, as in the cases mentioned in the 
Note on Ex. 28. 30. Gr. eig rrjv cKrjvriv 
into the tabernacle. 

6. Sprinkle of the blood seven times. 
A mystical number, signifying the full 
and perfect cleansing of sin, and carry- 
ing with it also an implication of the 
aggravated heinousness of the oifence as 
committed by a priest ; for this, it ap- 
pears, was peculiar to this sacrifice for 
sin, and to that for the w^hole congrega- 
tion. We do not read of its being 
adopted in any other case. It was to 
be sprinkled towards the vail of the 
sanctuary, Avhere the Lord, who was to 
be propitiated, dwelt, and from this 
ceremony being practised in no other 
instance save in that of the congrega- 
tional offering, it would seem to imply 
that in respect to offences of this nature, 
there was peculiar need of the offerer's 
having recourse to that ' blood of sprink- 
ling,' which could alone speak peace to 
his conscience. The restoration of the 
divine favor was not so easily obtained. 



all the fat of the bullock for the 
sin-offering; the fat that covereth 
the inwards, and all the fat that is 
upon the inwards, 

9 And the two kidneys, and the 
fat that is upon them, which is by 
the flanks, and the caul above the 
liver, with the kidneys, it shall he 
take away, 

10 >iAs it was taken off from the 
bullock of the sacrifice of peace- 
offerings : and the priest shall burn 
them upon the altar of the burnt- 
offering. 

11 iAnd the skin of the bullock, 
and all his flesh, with his head, 
and with his legs, and his inwards, 
and his dung : 

h ch. 3. 3, 4; 5. i Exod. 29. 14. Numb. 19. 5. 



He must urge 



He must struggle for it. 
the plea of atoning blood again and 
again.- — ^ Before the vail of the sanc- 
tuary. Heb. iDipr^ riSis ^::.s titm 

eth pene paroketh hakkodesh, and be- 
fore the vail of holiness. Gr. Kara to 
KaraTrcracrfi.a to ayiov before the holy vail. 
The clause is plainly exegetical of the 
preceding ' before the Lord,' which is 
equivalent to ' before the Shekinah,' and 
this we know had its residence in the 
holy of holies, just behind the separat- 
ing vail between the tw^o apartments, 
called in Heb. 9. 3, ' the second vail.' 

7. And the priest shall put, 8fC. This 
also was peculiar to this sacrifice, and 
to that for the whole congregation, v. 
17. The blood was thus applied to each 
horn or spire of the incense-altar, pro- 
bably to intimate that no intercessions 
or prayers would be accepted from the 
sinner till he was absolved from his 

guilt by virtue of the atoning blood. 

?r Shall pour all the blood ; i. e. all that 
is left after the sprinkling. It could 
not be absolutely all, but the quantity 
of blood sprinkled in the sanctuary ^vas 
so small, that the remainder might, 
without impropriety, be termed the 
whole. Daring the Israelites' residence 
in the wilderness, it is probable they 



44 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490 



12 Even the whole bullock shall 
he carry forth without the camp 
unto a clean place, kwhere the 
ashes are poured out, and iburn 

had receptacles under ground with con- 
veyances to carry off the blood. After 
the building of the Temple, there were 
two holes, one on the west side of the 
altar, the other on the south, by which 
the blood was conveyed into a subter- 
ranean channel, communicating with 
the brook Kedron. 

12. Shall he carry forth without the 
camp. Heb. J^'^^IH hotzi, he or one 
shall carry forth ; undoubtedly an in- 
stance of that indefinite or impersonal 
form of expression, so common in He- 
brew, where the singular, like the 
French ' on dit,' they say, has the im- 
port of the plural. And thus it is ren- 
dered both here and in v. 21, by the Gr. 
E^oKTovoLv, they shall carry forth. So 
in V. 24, our version renders • in the 
place where they kill the burnt-offering,' 
when the original is ^HID'^ yish^hat, he 
or one kills. This is an idiom of very 
extensive use and of the utmost import- 
ance in the sacred writings. See it 
more fully illustrated in the Note on 
Lev. 1. 5. This precept has a primary 
reference to the state of the Israelites 
during their wandering in the wilder- 
ness. After their settlement in Canaan 
and the erection of the Temple at Jeru- 
salem, they carried them out of the city. 
The sacrifice, now considered as having 
the sin of the priest transferred from 
himself to it, by his imposition of 
hands, was become unclean and abomi- 
nable, and was carried as it were out 
of God's sight. The ceremony, there- 
fore, was strikingly significant of the 
sinfulness of this sin. The fat portions 
only of the victim, with the kidneys 
and caul, after being detached from the 
rest were to be burnt upon the altar. 
No other part was to come near the 
altar, nor was the least share of it per- 
mitted to either priest or people, but it 



him on the wood with fire : where 
the ashes are poured out shall he 
be burnt. 



ch. G. 11. 



» Heb. 13. 11. 



v/as to be carried out of the camp skin 
and all entire, and burnt in a fire on the 
ground. By this was denoted the of- 
ferer's being in a state of guilt, wholly 
unworthy to communicate with God, 
and like the ofiering itself, deserved to 
be excluded the society of his people, 
till reconciled by the sacrifice now made 
in his stead. Thus Christ, who was 
made sin or a sin-off'ering for us, ^ suf- 
fered without the gate? Even this 
slight accordance of the type and the 
antitype serves to show how completely 
all the grand observances of the law 

had their realization in him. *^ Burn 

him on the wood with fire. Not upon 
an altar, but on a fire made with wood 
upon the ground, to show the odious- 
ness of the sin. As the whole burnt 
sacrifices were burnt on the altar be- 
cause they were an ^ ofiering of sweet- 
smelling savor to God,' so this was burnt 
without the camp upon the ground to 
shov/ that the odor of it was ungrateful 

and abominable. ^ Where the ashes 

are poured out. There were two places 
where the ashes were poured, one by 
the side of the altar where they were 
first laid, of which mention is made 
Lev. 1. 16 ; the other, without the pre- 
cincts of the camp, to which, as to a 
general receptacle, the ashes and other 
refuse matter of the camp was conveyed. 
The publicity here given to the burning 
of the sin-offering of the priest, might 
be intended to convey a deeper impres- 
sion of the enormity of his sin compared 
with that of the common people, al- 
though the same thing was commanded 
in case the whole congregation had 
sinned. There was, therefore, a pecu- 
liar reproach attached to this sacrifice, 
intimated by the repetition of the pre- 
sent order — from the ofifence upon which 
it was founded. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IV. 



45 



13 H And mif the whole congre- 
gation of Israel sin through igno- 
rance, nand the thing be hid from 
the eyes of the assembly, and they 
have done somewhat against any 
of the commandments o^ the Lord 
concerning things which should 
not be done, and are guilty ; 

14 When the sin which they have 
sinned against it is known, then 
the congregation shall offer a young- 
bullock for the sin, and bring him 
before the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation. 

15 And the elders of the congre- 
gation oshall lay their hands upon 
the head of the bullock before the 
Lord : and the bullock shall be 
killed before the Lord. 

n^ Numb. 15. 24. Josh. 7. 11. ^ ch. 5. 2, 
3, 4, 17. o ch. 1. 4. 



2.— The Sin-offering for the. Whole 
Congregation. 

13. If the whole congregation sin. 
This probably refers to some oversight 
in acts of religious worship, or to some 
transgression of the letter of the law 
commiited, not presumptuously, but 
heedlessly, as in the case mentioned 
1 Sam. 14. 32 ; where, after smiting the 
Philistines, the Israelites ^ flew upon 
the spoil, and took sheep, and oxen, and 
calves, and slew them on the ground : 
and the people did eat them with the 
blood.^ This was a consfresjational sin. 
The sacrifices and rites in this case 
were the same as in the preceding ; only 
here the elders laid their hands on the 
head of the victim, in the name of all 

the congregation. M And the thing 

he hid from the eyes of the assembly. 
Heb. inpn hakkdhal, the word properly 
answering to our English word church, 
as it is well rendered by Ainsworth. 
Accordingly Stephen says of Moses, 
Acts 7. 38, ' This is he that was in the 
church in the wilderness with the angel 
that spake to him.' By ' the things 
ueing hidden from their eyes,' is meant 



16 pAnd the priest that is anoint- 
ed shall bring of the bullock's blood 

j to the tabernacle of the congrega- 
' tion : 

17 And the priest shall dip his 
finger in some of the blood, and 
sprinkle it seven times before the 
Lord, even before the vail. 

18 And he shall put some of the 
blood upon the horns of the altar 
which is before the Lord, that is 
in the tabernacle of the congrega- 
tion, and shall pour out all the 
blood at the bottom of the altar of 
the burnt-offering, which is at the 
door of the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation. 

19 And he shall take all his fat 
from him, and burn it upon the 
altar. 

P ver. 6. Heb. 9. 12, 13, 14. 

that they were not for the present sensi- 
ble of their error or transgression. The 
reference is to a case where they had 
ignorantly or inadvertently committed 
some act which they presumed at the 
time to be lawful, but which subsequent 
reflection or instruction convinced them 
was sinful. In this case, as soon as 
they came to a sense of their wrong-do- 
ing, the elders, or heads of the tribes, 
as the representatives of the whole body, 
were to bring a young bullock to the 
tabernacle and present it to the high- 
priest, who was to ofier it by way of 
atonement for them, in the same man- 
ner and with the same circumstances, 
that he did the other for himself. 

15. The elders shall lay their hands. 
Not the priests in this case, but the 
heads and magistrates of the nation, 
who were seventy in number. As all 
the people could not lay their hands 
upon the bullock, it was suflicient that 
it were done by the elders, or a part of 
them, in the name of the congregation. 
Maimonides says, that the number of 
eiders that officiated on this occasion 
was three. This act denoted the faith 
of the people in a coming Messiah, ' up- 



46 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



20 And he shall do with the bul- 
lock as he did qwith the bullock 
for a sin-offering, so shall he do 
with this : rand the priest shall 
make an atonement for them, and it 
shall be forgiven them. 

21 And he shall carry forth the 
bullock without the camp, and burn 
him as he burned the first bullock : 
his D. sin-offering for the congre- 
gation. 

22 1[ When a ruler hath sinned, 
and sdone somewhat through igno- 
rance agai?ist any of the command- 
ments of the Lord his God con- 
cerning things which should not 
be done, and is guilty ; 

23 Or tif his sin, wherein he hath 
sinned, come to his knowledge ; he 

fiver. 3. rjSTuxn. 15. 25. Dan. 9. 24. Rom. 
6. 11. Heb. 2. 17. and 10. 10, 11, 12. IJohn 
1. 7. and 2. 2. s yer. 2. 13. ^ ver. 14. 

on whom the Lord would lay the ini- 
quity of us alW Is. 53. 6. 

3. — The Sin-offering for the Ruler. 

22. When a ruler hath sinned. Heb. 
iJ^'ilDD nasi, prince, i. e. one preferred, 
elevated, advanced above others ; from 
'^Til ndsd, to lift up. It is a common 
appellation both of supreme and subor- 
dinate rulers, and is very frequently 
used to signify the head of a tribe. 
The Jews understand it peculiarly of 
the head or prince of the great Sanhe- 
drim, who was the king himself, while 
they were under kingly government j 
but it seems more reasonable to under- 
stand it of all the great officers or ma- 
gistrates ; any one who held any kind 
of political dignity among the people. 

IT And is guilty, or if his sin come 

to his knowledge ; i. e. if he is presently 
reminded of it by the checks of his own 
conscience, or if after a time it be sug- 
gested to him by others. The ceremo- 
nies in this case diftered from those in 
the case of the offering of the anointed 
priest, inasmuch as the blood of the 
ruler's sin-offering, which was a kid of 



shall bring his offering, a kid of the 
goats, a male without blemish : 

24 And uhe shall lay his hand 
upon the head of the goat, and kill 
it in the place where they kill the 
burnt-offering before the Lokd : it 
is a sin-offering. 

25 xAnd the priest shall take of 
the blood of the sin-offering with 
his finger, and put it upon the 
horns of the altar of burnt-offering, 
and shall pour out his blood at the 
bottom of the altar of burnt-of- 
fering. 

2Q And he shall burn all his fat 
upon the altar, as ythe fat of the 
sacrifice of peace-offerings : ^and 
the priest shall make an atonement 
for him as concerning his sin, and 
it shall be forgiven him. 



u ver. 4, &c- 
20- Num. 15. 28, 



^ ver. 30. y ch. 3. 5. z ver. 



the goats instead of a bullock, was not 
to be brought into the tabernacle, but 
was all to be bestowed upon the brazen 
altar, nor was the flesh of it to be burnt 
without the camp j which intimated 
that the sin of a ruler, though worse 
than that of a common person, was not 
so heinous as of that of the high priest, 
or of the whole congregation. 

25. Put it upon the horns of the altar. 
In every sacrifice for sin the horns of 
one or other of the altars were required 
to be touched with the blood, but with 
this difference, that in the sacrifice for 
the sins of the high priest and the 
people, when the blood of the victim 
was brought into the sanctuary, the 
horns of the altar of incense were 
sprinkled, in others, those of the altar 
of holocaust. 

2Q. He shall burn all his (i. e. its)/a^ 
upon the altar. Nothing is here said, 
as in the case of two of the previous 
offerings, v. 12, 21, which were to be 
burnt without the camp, of the disposal 
that should be made of the flesh of the 
the victim. But in Lev. 6. 26, 29, and 
Num. 18, 9, 10, the prescribed law of 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IV. 



47 



27 If And aif any one of the com- 
mon people sin through ignorance, 
while he doeth somewhat against 
any of the commandments of the 
Lord concerning things which 
ought not to be done, and be guilty ; 

28 Or Mf his sin which he hath 
sinned come to his knowledge; 
then he shall bring his ojBfering, a 
kid of the goats, a female without 
blemish, for his sin which he hath 
sinned. 

29 cAnd he shall lay his hand 
upon the head of the sin-offering, 
and slay the sin-offering in the 
place of the burnt-offering. 

30 And the priest shall take of 
the blood thereof with his finger, 
and put it upon the horns of the 
altar of burnt-offering, and shall 
pour out all the blood thereof at 
the bottom of the altar. 

31 And dhe shall take away all 
the fat thereof, eas the fat is taken 

a ver. 2. Num. 15. 27. ^ ver. 23. c yer. 4. 
24. d ch. 3. 14. e ch. 3. 3. 

the Sin-offering is, that the priest and 
his sons should eat it in the sanctuary, 
and no where else ; provided that they 
were free from uncleanness. 

4.— r/ie Sin-offering for one of the 
common people. 

27. If any one of the common people. 
Heb. f ^^n ti^)2 t\n^ :2r&5 fei^ im ne- 
phesh ahath meam hCidretz, if one soul 
of the people of the land ; i. e. as 
rightly rendered, any of the common 
people, whether private Israelite, priest, 
or Levite, with the exception of the 
high priest and ruler mentioned above. 

28. A kid of the goats. This was 
the ordinary sacrifice prescribed on such 
occasions : but when the poverty of the 
offerer prevented such an oblation, one 
of less value was appointed ; Lev. 5. 
]1, 12. The ceremonies were nearly 
the same as in the preceding cases. 

31. For a sweet savor unto the Lord. 
Although this phrase is used concerning 



away from off the sacrifice of 
peace-offerings ; and the priest 
shall burn it upon the altar for a 
fsweet savour unto the Lord : gand 
the priest shall make an atonement 
for him, and it shall be forgiven 
him. 

32 And if he bring a lamb for a 
sin-offering, Hie shall bring it a 
female without blemish. 

33 And he shall lay his hand up- 
on the head of the sin-offering, 
and slay it for a sin-offering in the 
place where they kill the burnt- 
offering. 

34 And the priest shall take of 
the blood of the sin-offering with 
his finger, and put it upon the 
horns of the altar of burnt-offering, 
and shall pour out all the blood 
thereof at tiie bottom of the altar: 

35 And he shall take away all 
the fat thereof, as the fat of the 
lamb is taken away from the sacri- 

fExod. 29. 18. ch. 1. 9. ever 20. ^^ver. 
28. 



the burnt-offering and the peace-offer- 
ing, yet it is nowhere said of the fore- 
going sin-offerings ; ' the reason of 
which,' says Bp. Patrick, ' 1 am not 
able to give, unless it were to comfort 
the lowest sort of people with the hope 
of God's mercy, though their offerings 
w^ere mean compared with those of 
others.' 

33. And slay it for a sin-offering in 
the place where they kill the burnt' 
offering. Here again the Gr. gives 
correctly the plural form acpa^ova-iv they 
shall slay, just as our translation in the 
same clause renders tDlHlD'^ yish^hatj 
though singular, they kill, they arc 
accustomed to kill, 

35. According to the offerings made by 
fire unto the Lord. Heb. nifT^ '^ID^ ^2? 
al ish'e Yehovah ; which maybe render^ 
ed, upon, with, or beside the offerings 
made by fire ; i. e. in addition to the 
burnt-offerings which were daily con- 
sumed upon the altar. As for the flesh 



48 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



fice of the peace-offerings ; and the 
priest shall burn them upon the 
altar, iaccording to the offerings 
made by fire unto the Lord : kand 



or bodies of this and the foregoing Sin- 
offering of the rulers, they were not, 
like those of the high priest and the con- 
gregation, burnt without the camp, but 
were eaten by the priests, as directed, 
Lev. 6. 26-30. 

Remarks. — (2.) Sins of ignorance, 
though of less guilt than sins of pre- 
sumption, do as really need the blood 
of atonement, and as truly form the 
matter of repentance, as any others, 

(2.) From the fact that greater sacri- 
fices and more burdensome rites were 
appointed for the priest and the prince 
than for private persons, it is evident 
that the sins of some men are of a more 
heinous character, more scandalous and 
pernicious, than those of others. Per- 
sons occupying a public station, which 
makes them conspicuous, cannot sin 
with impunity, however it may be with 
others. 

(13.) As there might be among the 
people of Israel a sin of the whole con- 
gregation, so at the present time there 
may be a sin of the whole nation, which 
needs, as it were, a national atonement. 

(28.) ' If his sin come to his know- 
ledge.' Whenever conscience charges 
upon us former sins committed, whether 
against God or man, we are bound to 
make restitution, though years may 
have elapsed since the event occurred. 



CHAPTER V. 

THE TRESPASS- OFFEHING. 

The original word for Trespass-offer- 
ing is d^i^ ashdm, from a root of the 
same letters tiXH^ dsham.y to fail in 
duty, to transgress, to be guilty, or, as 
it is for the most rendered in our ver- 
sion, to trespass. The leading idea is 
plainly that of guilt, and it is exten- 
sively admitted by lexicographers that 



the priest shall make an atonement 
for his sin that he hath committed, 
and it shall be forgiven him. 

i ch. 3. 5. k ver 26, 31. 

the degree of guilt denoted by the term 
is greater than that denoted by the word 
&^t3n 'hdtd, to sin, from which comes 
the appropriate term for sin-offerings. 
The Trespass- offerings, as we have 
already remarked, so greatly resembled 
the Sin-offerings, that it is by no means 
easy to distinguish between them. The 
occasions on Avhich they were offered 
were much the same, and the ceremo- 
nies much the same also. Indeed, we 
sometimes have the same oblations 
called interchangeably Sin-offerings 
and Trespass-offerings, as particularly 
Lev. 5. 6-8 : 'And he shall bring his tres- 
pass-offering (1?21DJ^ ashdmo) unto the 
Lord for his sin which he hath sinned^ 
(a^Dtl ^Xi< ini<t:n ^^ al 'hattdtho asher 
^hdtd) a female from the flock, a lamb 
or a kid of the goats, for a sin-offering. 
And if he be not able to bring a lamb, 
then he shall bring for his trespass which 
he hath committed (i^ton ^IDi^ "l^QtDfi^ 
ashdmo asher ^hdtd) two turtle-doves, 
or two young pigeons, unto the Lord ; 
one for a sin-offering (fii^i^n^ lehat- 
tdth) and the other for a burnt-offering.' 
Here it is observable that the offence 
committed is called indifferently a sin 
and a trespass, and the sacrifice offered, 
a trespass-offering and a sin-offering. 
Notwithstanding this there were marked 
points of difference between the two. 
Sin-offerings were sometimes offered for 
the whole congregation ; Trespass- offer- 
ings never but for particular persons. 
Bullocks were sometimes used ibr Sin- 
offerings, never for Trespass-offerings. 
The blood of the Sin-offering was put 
on the horns of the altar ; that of the 
Trespass-offering was only sprinkled 
round about the bottom of the altar. 
Still we are left in ignorance of the pre- 
cise nature of the distinction, or for 
what reaso7is the law in one case pre- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER V. 



49 



scribed one, and in another the other. 
Lightfoot, guided by rabbinical author- 
ity, makes the difference to consist in 
this, that both indeed were offered for 
the same sort of transgressions, but the 
tSuJ^^ dshdm, or trespass-offering was to 
be offered when it was doubtful whe- 
ther a person had transgressed or not 5 
as for instance, suppose that he had 
eaten fat, and w^as afterwards in doubt 
whether it was the fat belonging to the 
muscular flesh, which was lawful to be 
eaten, or the fat of the inwards, which 
w^as unlawful ; then he was to offer an 
tD^"5< dshcim. But if it were certain, 
and he knew that he had trespassed, he 
must offer the Hi^t:)! ^hattcMh, or sin-of- 
fering, Maimonides is of opinion that 
the offences for which the t21ZJ5< dsham 
was oflered were inferior to those for 
which the nJJ^t^n ^hattddh was offered. 
Bochart, on the other hand, and we 
think with much better reason, holds 
that the offences expiated by tlL'^ 
dshdm were more grievous than those 
expiated by tlHi.'Otl ^hattddh. Aben 
Ezra makes Hi^ton ^hattddh to signify 
a sacrifice offered for purging offences 
committed through ignorance of the 
law J fitlJ)^ dshdm for such as were 
committed through forgetfulness of it. 
Others again make the difference to be, 
that the nJ^ton ^hattddh was for offences 
proved by witnesses ; the tu^Jj^ dshdm 
for secret faults known to others only 
by the offender's confession. But 
against all these hypotheses very spe- 
cious objections may be urged, and it 
is therefore to the following that we 
are disposed to give the preference. 

It is contended, and we think upon 
very plausible grounds, by several dis- 
tinguished critics, that the class of 
offences to W'hich the word StlJJ^ dshdm 
is applied, although ultimately com- 
mitted against God, were yet always, 
or generally, such as involved an injury 
towards one's neighbor ; and in this 
sense they affirm that our English word 
trespass is its most suitable representa- 
tive. It is certain, as a matter of fact, 

5 



that most of the offences which were to 
be expiated by the Trespass-offering 
were of this character. Indeed, Outram, 
whose authority on this subject is per- 
haps of more weight than that of any 
other writer, observes that in all cases 
where the ^Ti< dshdm was required, 
there was some wrong or injury done 
to a neighbor, except in the case of the 
Nazarite defiled by the dead, Num. 
6. 12, and of the leper. Lev. 14. 12. 
Still we cannot positively affirm that 
this is the designed import of the 
term, and are obliged therefore to leave 
the matter enveloped more or less in 
that cloud of obscurity which, as we 
have already remarked in the introduc- 
tion to the preceding chapter;.rests upon 
the distinction between the Sin and the 
Trespass-offering. Thus much how^ever 
is clear, that the class of offences for 
which the Trespass-offering was to be 
brought included those which, though 
not amounting to wilful and presumptu- 
ous acts^ w^ere yet usually committed 
against knowledge, and were therefore 
of a higher grade of guilt than the sins 
of mere ignorance and infirmity which 
were contemplated "by the Sin-offerings, 
Several such are mentioned in the com- 
mencement of this chapter, viz. the 
concealing of any part of the truth by a 
witness properly adjured ; the touching 
any unclean person or thing ; and the 
swearing rashly that he w^ould do what 
might be sinful, or what he might not 
be able to perform. In all these cases 
a female lamb or kid was to be offered^ 
and confession made of guilt. The 
ceremonies of oblation were precisely 
the same as those of the Sin-offering, 
except that the blood, instead of being 
put upon the horns of the altar, was to 
be sprinkled round about the altar. If 
the offender was too poor to give a 
lamb, he was to bring two turtle-doves 
or two young pigeons, the one for this 
particular sin w^hich burdened his con- 
science, the other for a burnt-offering 
for his sins in general - making expia- 
tion first for that in which he had more 



50 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



immediately offended. If even this was 
beyond his means, the tenth part of an 
ephah of flour, or about five pints, might 
be substituted. 

Another class of oflTences to which 
this offering had reference, was that in 
which some trespass was committed 
ignorantly or undesignedly against the 
holy things of the Lord, Lev. 5. 15 com- 
pared with Lev. 22. These were things 
dedicated to the Lord under the cere- 
monial law, or prescribed or prohibited 
by its rules, and were very numerous. 
Thus if one had unwittingly kept back 
any of the required offerings, or had 
eaten within his private gates the tithes 
that belonged to the priests, or had 
failed to sanctify the firstlings of the 
males ; in these cases he was to bring 
as a Trespass-offering a ram without 
blemish. But besides this, he was to 
make restitution, with the addition of 
the fifth part, according to the estimate 
formed by the priest. Nay, if he even 
only suspected that he had offended in 
any of these holy things, he was to 
bring the ram as a Trespass-offering, 
and to pay the estimated value, but 
without the addition of the twenty per 
cent. 

A third class of offences were those 
of a somewhat deeper dye — certain 
open and v/ilful injuries and violatioas 
of law, such as thefts, violence, false- 
swearing, deceit and fraud. ' If a soul 
sin and commit a trespass against the 
Lord, and lie against his neighbor, &c.' 
Thus if one denied what had been com- 
mitted to his trust, or dealt fraudulently 
in any concern of partnership, or took 
any thing away by open violence, or 
secretly deceived his neighbor to his 
loss, or denied having found that which 
was lost ; in all these cases the delin- 
quent must bring a ram for a Trespass- 
offering, and must pay the value, esti- 
mated by the priest, of the injury done, 
with the addition of the fifth part there- 
of. Doing thus, it was said that * the 
priest should make an atonement for 
him before the Lord, and it should be 



forgiven him for any thing of all that 
he hath done in trespassing therein.' 

On the general subject of the Sin and 
Trespass-offerings we may remark, 
that while the purpose and design of 
these various ceremonies have been dis- 
closed so far as they can convey moral 
or spiritual knowledge to our minds, 
there is doubtless much in the external 
forms that must be referred to the sove- 
reign will of God. No other satisfac- 
tory reason can be assigned for the 
requirement in certain cases of one of 
these species of offerings rather than 
another, than that it was the divine 
pleasure so to have it. In the ordi- 
nances before us it is clear, that the 
wilful sins for which a ram was the 
largest offering required, were greater 
than those infirmities for which a bul- 
lock was demanded. If the atonement 
had really lain in the type, this would 
have borne almost an appearance of in- 
justice. But as it was no doubt intend- 
ed by every kind of expiation to fix the 
attention upon the Great Atonement 
thereafter to be made for all sin, the 
intrinsic value of the particular offering 
was a matter of comparatively little 
importance. Indeed it is very conceiv- 
able, as we have already remarked, 
that a sacrifice of less value may have 
been ordained for sins of greater enor- 
mity with the express purpose of con- 
veying the intimation that the atoning 
virtue was not in the sacrifice, but in 
the better blood which was to be shed 
at a future day on Calvary. Compared 
with this every typical prefiguration, 
even the most costly that could be de- 
vised fell so infinitely short in value, 
that it might have been a special aim 
of divine wisdom to ordain a less in 
order the more forcibly to impress up- 
on the mind the intrinsic inefficacy of 
a greater. 

But while it was not especially im- 
portant for the worshipper to know why 
one animal was chosen to expiate one 
sin, and another another, it was import- 
ant for him to know that for every par- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER V. 



51 



CHAPTER V. 
4 ND if a soul sin, aand hear the 
"^^ voice of swearing, and is a 

a 1 Kings 8. 31. Matt. 26. 63. 

ticular sin there was a remedy pro- 
vided ; so that no man need incur the 
divine wrath, either by reason of his 
most secret faults or his most flagrant 
violations of the law. This is the very 
essence of gospel truth. No sin, not 
even the smallest or most imintentional, 
could be forgiven without a sacrifice. 
But no man need await the judicial 
punishment. As soon as he knew his 
fault, or suspected it, he had his reme- 
dy. He knew what he was to do. If 
he did it not the condemnation that en- 
sued was self-procured. It was not the 
fault of the law, nor the fault of the 
judge, nor the fault even of his own 
natural weakness or infirmity, if the 
evil he had committed was not forgiven 
him. This is the gospel. Whatever 
men may think of their natural condi- 
tion as an extenuation of their sins ; 
however they may venture to impugn 
the justice that assures their punish- 
ment 5 this at least cannot be gain- 
sayed — the remedy is provided ; the 
atonement is made Imown ; the mode 
of making it personably available is 
clearly stated ; it is efficacious for 
every sin ; it is within the reach of 
every sinner- Christ by his one obla- 
tion has made satisfaction for the sins 
of the whole world. If any man chooses 
to abide the consequences of his trans- 
gressions, rather than seek forgiveness 
in the way prescribed, the condemna- 
tion is his o'^Ti deliberate choice. 

Various offences of Infirmity or Inad- 
vertence for which the Trespass-offer- 
ing was prescribed. 

1. — In concealing Knowledge. 

1. And hear the voice of swearing. 

Heb. n^i^ ilp n5'^?2^J1 veshdmedh kol 

dldh, and hear the voice of adjuration, 

execration J or oath. That is, when one 



witness, whether he hath seen or 
known of it ; if he do not utter tl, 
then he shall ^bear his iniquity. 

b ver. 17. ch. 7- 18, and 17, 16, and 19. 8, 
and 20. 17- Numb. 9. 13. 



is adjured or put upon his oath as a wit- 
ness of any fact which is brought into 
legal question. The precept does not, 
it would seem, relate to the duty of in- 
forming against a common profane 
swearer, but to the case of one Vvho is 
sunmioned to give evidence before the 
civil magistrate. Judges, among the 
Jews, had pov/er to adjure not only the 
witnesses, but the person suspected 
(contrary to the criminal jurisprudence 
of modern times, which requires no man 
to accuse himself ), as appears from the 
high priest's adjuring our Savior, who 
thereupon answered, though he had be- 
fore been silent, Mat. 26. 63, 64. So 
the apostle says, I Thess. 5. 27, ^I 
charge (adjure) you by the Lord that 
this epistle be read unto all the holy 
brethren.' Now if a person ^ heard the 
voice of swearing,' i. e. if he were ad- 
jured by an oath of the Lord to testify 
what he knev/ in relation to any matter 
of fact in question, and yet through fear 
or favor refused to give evidence, or 
gave it but in part, he was to ^ bear his 
iniquity ;' i. e. to bear the punishment 
of his iniquity, if he repented not and 
brought not the appointed sacrifices, It 
seems to be implied that such an one 
should be considered in the sight of God 
as guilty of the transgression which he 
has endeavored to conceal, as may be 
inferred from Prov. 29. 24, ' Whoso is 
partner with a thief, hateth his own 
soul : he heareth cursing and bewrayeth 
it not ;' i. e. he hears the words of the 
magistrate adjuring him, and binding 
his soul under the penalty of a ' curse' 
to declare the whole truth, yet he ' be- 
wrayeth,' or uttereth it not ; he persists 
in wickedly stifling his evidence and 
concealing the facts j surely such an 
one is a ' partner' with the culprit, and 
by exposing himself to the consequences 



52 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



2 Or cif a soul touch any unclean | 
thing, Avhether it be a carcass of 
an unclean beast, or a carcass of 
unclean cattle, or the carcass of 
unclean creeping things, and if it 
be hidden from him ; he also shall 
be unclean, and ^guilty. 

3 Or if he touch ethe uncleanness 

c ch. 11. 24, 28, 31, 39. Numb. 19. 11, 13, 
16. d ver 17. e ch. 12. and 13. and 15. 

of thus withholding the truth, may be 
justly said to ' hate his own soul.' — ■- 
IT And is a witness. The Hebrew can- 
ons speak of four different kinds of 
oaths J (1.) The oath of pronouncing a 
thing (of which see v. 4) ; (2.) Vain 
or rash oaths (forbidden Ex. 20. 7) ; 
(3.) the oath concerning that which 
w^as delivered to keep ; (4.) the oath 
of witness; here mentioned. This they 
explain as follows j ^ As when witnesses 
can give testimony concerning goodS; 
and the owner requireth them to wit- 
ness, and they deny that they can give 
testimony, and swear that they cannot, 
&c., for such an oath they are to bring 
the sacrifice here appointed.' — Mai- 

monides. IT Whether he hath seen or 

known of it. That is, whether it be a 
matter v/hich has come under his own 
personal knowledge, or which he has 
learnt from the information of others. 
The spirit of the precept seems to re- 
quire a voluntary rendering of testimony 
when it w^as knowTi that information 
Avas sought, as well as a true and faith- 
ful declaration when summoned by le- 
gal process. ^ He shall bear his ini- 
quity. Heb. S^lDI i^T-l venCisd avono. 
The whole clause may perhaps be 
rendered, ' If he do not utter it, and 
shall bear his iniquity,' i. e. shall con- 
sequently remain subject to the wrath 
of God, and liable to condign punish- 
ment ; implying that this is a part of 
the sinful condition embraced under 
the hypothetic particle ' 2/,' which is 
not an improbable sense. And so in 
respect to the final clause of the three 
ensuing- verses, we may regard it as 



of man, whatsoever uncleanness it 
be that a man shall be defiled 
withal, and it be hid from him ; 
when he knoweth of it^ then he 
shall be guilty. 

4 Or if a soul swear, pronouncing 
with his lips ^to do evil, or gto do 
good, whatsoever it be that a man 

f See 1 Sam. 25. 22, Acts 23. 12. g See 
Mark 6. 23. 



a mere continuation of the conditional 
language of the verse, and not as declar- 
ative of the divine sentence respecting 
the offender. This declaration or ap- 
pointment is reserved to the 5th and 6th 
verses, where the corresponding duty is 
enjoined. In the original each of these 
clauses is introduced by the particle 
' and,' which would seem to have been 
improperly omitted by our own and 
most other translators. 
2. — In touching an unclean Thing, 

2. If a soul touch any unclean thing, 
whether it he, ^-c. That is, either the 
dead body of a clean animal, or the 
living or dead body of an unclean crea- 
ture. All such persons were required 
to wash themselves and their clothes in 
clean water, and were considered as 
unclean until evening. Lev. 11.8, 24. 31. 

IT If it be hidden from him. That 

is, if he be not aware of the uncleanness 
which he has contracted, and goes on 
to do those things which he would not 
be at liberty to do, provided he were 
conscious of his defilement, such as en- 
tering the tabernacle or eating of holy 
things, then when he comes to be ac- 
quainted with the fact he shall look 
upon himself as ' unclean,' just as if he 
knowingly touched the unclean thing, 
and consequently excluded from divine 
worship till he had offered the sacrifice 
appointed v. 6. 

3. — In touching an unclean Person. 

3. Or if he touch the uncleanness, S,-c. 
These different kinds of uncleanness 
are afterwards specified in detail, Lev. 
11-15, where see Notes. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER V. 



53 



shall pronounce with an oath, and 
it be hid from him ; when he know- 
eth of it, then he shall be guilty 
in one of these. 
5 And it shall be, when he shall 



4. — In taking a rash Oath. 
A. If a soul sicear, pronouncing with 
his lips, Sf'C. That is, when a man 
swears rashly that he will or will not 
do such and such a thing, as David, that 
he would kill Nabal ; Jepthah, that he 
would sacrifice to the Lord whatsoever 
should meet him coming out of his 
doors, &c. The original word i<t2D 
hdtc2, rendered pronounce, has the im- 
port oi rashly, inconsiderately, or fool- 
ishly uttering any thing, as may be 
seen, Ps. 106. 33, where it is said of 
Moses that • he spake unadvisedly (Heb. 
^u"!""' yehaita) with his lips.' So Prov. 
12. IS, ^ There is that speaketh (Heb. 
^"O^ bote, speaketh rashly) like the 
piercings of a sword.' Thus also Num. 
30. 6, 8, the phrase ' uttered ought with 
her lips,' is in Heb. ^t/Z'n raibta, the 
rash or incautious utterance of the lips. 
From the Heb. root is probably formed 
the Gr. Parrog battos, and Par-oXoyia 
hattologia, rash, vain, heedless speaking, 
which occurs Mat. 6. 7, ^ But when 
ye pray use not vain repetitions (Gr. 
/DUTTo^oyia battologia) as the heathens 
do ;' i. e. do not indulge in rash or in- 
considerate professions ; speak not un- 
advisedly to your Maker in prayer, 
either in making vows or promises, 
v/hatever may be the warmth of your 
devotions. The import of the precept 
IS doubtless the same as that contained 
Eccl. 5. 2. 'Be not rash with thy mouth, 
and let not thine heart be hasty to utter 
any thing before God.' The present 
rendering, ' vain repetitions,' does not 
seem to be warranted by sufficient au- 
thority. — As to the law itself, ^ it served 
very effectually,' says Michaelis, ' to 
maintain the honor of oaths, inasmuch 
as every oath, however inconsiderate, 
or unlawful, or impossible, was con- 

5* 



be guilty in one of these things, 
that he shall bconfess that he hath 
sinned in that thing : 

h ch. 16. 21. and 26. 40. Numb. 6. 7. Ezra 
10. 11, 12. 

sidered so far obligatory, that it was 
necessary to expiate its non-fulfilment 
by an offering 5 and it was at the same 
time, the best possible means of wean- 
ing the people from rash oaths, because 
the man who had become addicted to 
that unbecoming practice, would find 
himself too frequently obliged either to 
keep his oaths, how great soever the 
inconvenience, or else to make ofTerings 
for their atonement.' — Corament. on 

Laws of Moses, v. 4, p. 111. ^ And 

it be hid from him. It supposes that he 
did not rightly understand or duly con- 
sider the circumstances of his swearing, 
as whether the object were lawful, or 
the performance of it in his power. If 
these matters were ' hidden from him,» 
or he was not properly aware of them, 
he was bound to atone for the hastiness 
and rashness of his oath by a sacrifice. 

^ Then he shall be guilty in one of 

these. Hather, ^ and he shall be guilty 
in one of these,' i. e. one of the three 
cases above propounded. 

5. When he shall be guilty in one of 
these things. That is, in one of the four 
sins just mentioned. The words seem 
to be merely a repetition of the final 

clause of the preceding verse. 

5r Shall confess. At the same time 
laying his hands on the head of the vic- 
tim, in token of his faith in the great 
atoning sacrifice. The offering was not 
acceptable unless accompanied with a 
penitential confession, and an humble 
prayer for pardon. The form of the 
confession was substantially this : ^ I 
have sinned ; I have done iniquity ; I 
have trespassed, and have done thus and 
thus 5 and do return my repentance before 
thee ; and with this I make atonement.' 
The animal was then considered to 
bear vicariously the sins of the person 
who brought it. 



54 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



6 And he shall bring his trespass- 
offering unto the Lord for his sin 
which he hath sinned, a female 
from the flock, a lamb or a kid of 
the goats, for a sin-offering; and 
the priest shall make an atonement 
for him concerning his sin. 

6. He shall bring his trespass-offering. 
Heb. yty::^ ashdmoy which may be ren- 
dered guilt-offering J as the original 
till^^ asham properly signifies guilti- 
ness or trespass^ just as the word ren- 
dered * sin-oiFering,' ch. 4, literally sig- 
nifies 5271 or transgression. The one as 
■ well as the other pointed to Christ, of 
whom it is said, Is. 53. 10, ' Thou shalt 
make his soul an offering for sin ("DIL^ 
asham J a guilt or trespass-offering) .^ 
IT The priest shall make an atone- 
ment for him. As the atonement was 
not accepted without his repentance, so 
his repentance would not justify him 
without the atonement. In regard to 
the excellent uses of this feature of the 
general system of Levitical laws, we 
cite the remarks of Prof. Palfrey : — '■ If 
an offence were committed in ignorance, 
the offender, it is true, would not be 
culpable, except for having neglected 
to inform himself concerning the char- 
acter of his act. But his sin done una- 
wares might injure his neighbor as much 
as if it had been committed against 
light ; and society is interested in pre- 
venting that ignorance of the law among 
its members which allows them to do 
it harm. He who had unintentionally 
transgressed a law^, then, being called 
on, as soon as he came to know the ille- 
gality of what had been done, to put 
himself to expense because of it, found 
himself addressed by a motive to avoid 
such a mistake in future ; in other 
words, to acquaint himself with the law. 
The presumptuous offender was pun- 
ished, in the form of a Sin or Trespass- 
offering, by a fine, by which he ^ made 
atonement,' just as in our day, a man 
has made his atonement, or his recon- 
ciliation, with the society whose laws 



7 And iif he be not able to bring 
a lamb, then he shall bring for his 
trespass which he hath committed, 
two kturtle-doves, or two young 
pigeons, unto the Lord ; one for a 

' ch. 12. 8. and 14. 21. k ch. 1. 14. 



he has violated, when he has served out 
the time of his sentence in prison, or 
paid the prescribed pecuniary penalty. 
To a man who had offended without 
detection, except by his own conscience, 
the system would have an admirable 
application. It would never suffer his 
conscience to sleep, till he had informed 
against himself. It would be perpetu- 
ally addressing him with the offer to 
restore him to a fair standing, and to 
self-respect, as soon as he would come 
forward, avow his offence, present his 
offering, or (to phrase it differently) 
pay his fine, and make restitution to 
those v/hom he had injured, if the case 
was such, as to admit of this being 
done. And, once more, the system was 
of excellent influence in putting the le- 
gal penalty of fine in the form of a re- 
ligious offering. The wrong-doer, while 
he gave satisfaction to the state, and 
paid the fine of his delinquency, was 
thus reminded, that it was not only 
against the state that he had offended, 
and was at the same time made to ex- 
press the penitence of his heart to God.' 
— Lect. on Jew. Antiq. vol. \.p. 250. 

7. And if he he not able to bring a 
lamb. Heb. nr: "^^ Tl"^ 5>Mri li tDJ^ ini 
lo taggia yddo de seh, if his hand reach 
not to the suffciency (or value) of a 
lamb. This w^as ordained that the 
means of atonement might be within 
the ability of all classes. In reference 
to these offerings, Maimonides says, 
< If a poor man brought the oblation of 
the rich, he was accepted ; but if the 
rich brought the oblation of the poor, 
he was not accepted.' Pigeons were so 
plenteous in Palestine and the neigh- 
boring countries, that he must have been 
poor indeed, who could not afford a pair. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER V. 



55 



sin-offering, and the other for a 
fournt-offering. 

8 And he shall bring them unto 
the priest, who shall offer that 
which is for the sin-offering first, 
and hvring off his head from his 
neck, but shall not divide it asun- 
der : 

9 And he shall sprinkle of the 
blood of the sin-offering upon the 
side of the altar; and cithe rest of 
the blood shall be Avrung out at 
the bottom of the altar : it is £i sin- 
offering. 

10 And he shall offer the second 

1 cli. 1. 15. m ch. 4. 7, IS, 30, 34. 



Adrichomius, the traveler, tells us that 
there was a single tower to the south 
of Jerusalem, in which 5000 doves 
nestled. Maundrell also remarks of 
Kefteen, in Syria, that ' the adjacent 
fields abounding with corn give the in- 
habitants great advantage for breeding 
pigco7is, insomuch that you here find 
more dove-cotes than other houses.' 

IT One for a sin-offering^ and the 

other for a hurnt-offering ; it being 
necessary for the sinner first to have 
his peace made with God by the sin- 
offering, in order to have his burnt-of- 
fering or gift accepted. 

S. Wring off his head. Rather ' pinch 
or nip the head with the nail,' as ex- 
plained in the Note on Lev. 1. 15. It 
does not appear that the head v/as to 
be quite separated from the body. 

10. According to the manner. Heb. 
tO&tu^^ kammishpdt, according to the 
judgment^ i. e. according to the ordi- 
nance or statute ; the original term 
uSlI^ya mishpdt being used to signify 
the prescribed mode of doing any thing, 
particular in the matter of religious 

services. TT For his sin. Heb. 

irii^uHTG mt^hattatho, from his sin j 
1. e. cleansing him from it. 

11. But if he be not able to bring two 
turtle-doves. The kind consideration 
of the ability and circumstances of the 
offender, which distinguishes all these 



for a burnt-offering, according to 
tlie iimanner : oand the priest shall 
make an atonement for him for his 
sin which he hath sinned, and it 
shall be forgiven him. 

11 II But if he be not able to bring 
two turtle-doves, or two young pi- 
geons ; then he that sinned shall 
bring for his offering the tenth part 
of an ephah of fine flour for a sin- 
offering; qhe shall put no oil upon 
it, neither shall he put any frank- 
incense thereon : for it is a sin-of- 
fering. 

12 Then shall he bring it to the 

ii ch. 1. 34. ch. 4. 26. p Numb. 5. 15. 



Statutes, appears very conspicuous here. 
If any one were so impoverished that 
even an offering of two or three birds 
were not easily within his reach, then a 
slight oblation of flour was acceptable 
in its stead. But while we admire the 
graciousness of heaven in this respect, 
let us not fail to observe that the offence 
was invariably to be followed by some 
kind of atonement, in order to generate 
habits of the utmost vigilance and cir- 
cumspection in all their deportment. 
^ God m.ay be represented,' says R. Levi, 
' as declaring in this precept. It is not 
my will that such things should be done ; 
but if any man commit them through 
frailty, let him repent heartily, and 
keep a stricter guard over himself in 
future. Let him ofier sacrifices v>'hich 
may serve to imprint the remembrance 
of his guilt on his mind, and likewise 
to prevent him from offending again.' 
The prescribed offering in this case was 
the tenth part of an ephah of fine flour, 
or about three quarts, as the ephah con- 
tained a little more than seven gallons 
and a half. This was to be offered 
without oil, not only because that would 
make it too costly for the poor, but be- 
cause it was a sin-offering, and there- 
fore to show the loathsomeness of the 
sin for which it was offered, it must not 
be grateful either to the taste by oil, or 
to the smell by frankincense. 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



priest, and the priest shall take his 
handful of it, q even a memorial 
thereof, and burn it on the altar, 
^according to the offerings made 
by fire unto the Lord : it is a sin- 
olFering. 

13 sAnd the priest shall make an 
atonement for him as touching his 
sin that he hath sinned in one of 
these, and it shall be forgiven him: 
and t the remnant shall be the 
priest's, as a meat-offering. 

14 H And the Loud spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

15 ulf a soul commit a trespass, 
and sin through ignorance, in the 
holy things of the Lord ; then x he 

q ch. 2. % r ch. 4. 35- s ch. 4. 2fi. ' ch. 
2. 3. ^ ch. 22. 14. ^ Ezra 10. 19. 



12. Shall take his handful of it. 
Heb. ^^)2p i!<ii))2 ^3:^y2 f )2p kdmetz 
mimmenu melo kamfzoj shall grasp of 
it the fulness of his grasping. This 
was peculiar to all the meat-offerings, 
that a handful as a memorial should be 
burnt on the altar, while the remainder 
was eaten by the priests, except in the 
case of the priests' own offerings of this 
kind, which were all burnt, as appears 

from Lev. 6. 16,22,23. U According 

to the offerings. See Note on Lev. 4. 35. 

13. In one of these. That is, by one 
of these three before mentioned sacri- 
fices, either that of a lamb, or of two 
turtle-doves or young pigeons, or of 
fine flour. Rashi observes that as there 
were three classes of men, the rich, the 
poor, and the very poor j so there are 
three kinds of offerings prescribed in 
this chapter, adapted to the circum- 
stances of these several classes. 

5. — For a Trespass committed through 
Ignorance. 
1 A. If a soul commit a trespass. Heb. 
i>')3 ^>')ori timal maal, trespass a tres- 
pass. The original word is different 
from that which has hitherto been ren- 
dercd trespass^ and has mainly the im.- 



shall bring for his trespass unto the 
Lord a ram without blemish out 
of the flocks, with thy estimation 
by shekels of silver, after ythe she- 
kel of the sanctuary, for a trespass- 
offering : 

16 And he shall make amends for 
the harm that he hath done in the 
holy thing, and zshall add the fifth 
part thereto, and give it unto the 
priest ; aand the priest shall m.ake 
an atonement for him with the ram 
of the trespass-offering, and it shall 
be forgiven him. 

17 If And if a ^soul sin, and com- 
mit any of these things which arc 
forbidden to be done by the com- 

y Exod. 30. 13. ch. 27. 25. z ch. 6 6. and 
22. 14. and 27. 13, 15, 27, 31. Numb. 5. 7. 
a ch. 4. 26. b ch. 4. 2. 



port of prevaricating or dealing fraud- 
ulently, especially in matters of religion. 

IT I?i the holy things of the Lord. 

As for instance by not paying his full 
tithes j by neglecting to consecrate or 
redeem the first born ; by appropriating 
to his own use the first-fruits j or by 
eating any of those parts of the sacrifice 
which pertained to the priests. This 
was a trespass ; an offence which it is 
here supposed might be done through 
mistake, forgetfulness, or want of care 
or zeal ; for if it were done presumptu- 
ously, in contempt of the law, the 
offender died without mercy, Heb. 10. 

28. *fr With thine estimation. Or, 

' with thy valulation.' That is, with 
so much money as should be an ade- 
quate satisfaction for the wrong done to 
the priest. This estimation was to be 
made by the priest, as appears from 
Lev. 27. 8, 12. Or it may mean, as the 
ancient versions generally understood 
it, that the ram should be at least of the 
value of two shekels, the plural for the 
dual. IT After the shekel of the sanc- 
tuary. See Note on Ex. 30. 13. 

6. — The Doubtful Trespass. 
17. If a soul sin, S,'C. In order still 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER V. 



57 



mandments of the Lord ; c though 
lie wist it not, yet is he *^ guilty, 
and shall bear his iniquity. 

18 eAnd he shall bring a ram 
without blemish out of the flock, 
with thy estimation, for a trespass- 
offering unto the priest ; f and the 

c ver. 15. ell. 4. 2, 13. 22, 27. Ps. 19. 12. 
Luke 12. 4S. d ver. 1. 2. c ver. 15. f ver 16. 



more effectually to deter the chosen 
race from all irreverence towards any 
thing peculiarly dedicated to God and 
his service, it is here enacted, that if 
any one sinned in regard to the use of 
things which he only suspected to be 
sacred — about which he was left in sus- 
pense whether he had offended or not — 
even in this case, that he might be sure 
of being on the safe side, he was to 
bring his ram as a tresspasser, and pay 
the value of the thing according to the 
priest's estimation, as ordered v. 15, 
only with this difference, that the addi- 
tional prescribed fifth part was here to 
be dispensed with, inasmuch as there 
was some uncertainty whether he had 
actually transgressed or no. It would 
perhaps seem, from the letter of the 
two passages, that the case here men- 
tioned was the same wdth that in the 
preceding ch., v. 27, yet the different 
offerings prescribed seem to preclude 
this idea. In the former case the sacri- 
fice appointed was a kid of the goats or 
a female lamb ; but in the present, an 
unblemished ram was prescribed. The 
previous passage, moreover, is to be 
understood of w.oral prohibitions^ of 
things concerning others: this on the 
other hand, has respect to ceremonial 
precepts touching sacrifices or other 
things pertaining to divine worship. 

Remarks. — (1.) We are not to ac- 
count our duty discharged merely by 
avoiding sin ourselves j we are bound to 
use our utmost endeavors to prevent it 
in others, and not to shrink from the 
responsibilii}'- or odium of bearing pub- 
lic testimony against it. Especially 



priest shall make an atonement 
for him concerning his ignorance 
wherein he erred and wist it not, 
and it shall be forgiven him. 

19 It is a trespass-offering : g he 
hath certainly trespassed against 
the Lord. 

s Ezra 10. 2. 



does this apply to such sins as brought 
dishonor upon the holy name of God. 
A man may be patient in regard to 
wrongs done to himself, but not in regard 
to those that are done to the Most High. 

(5.) * Shall confess that he hath sin- 
ned in that thing.' Confession of sin, 
in order to be acceptable, must be par- 
ticular. Such was David's confession ; 
^ I have done this evil ;' and such 
iVchan's. It is not enough to rest in 
generals. 

(7.) ^ If he be not able to bring a 
lamb.' It is not the greatness of the 
gift but the heart of the giver, which 
God regards. 

(16.) ^ Shall make amends.' Re- 
pentance for WTong done to our neighbor 
is incomplete unless accompanied by 
restitution. 

(IS.) ' The priest shall make atone- 
ment for him.' The great Christian 
doctrine that to the atonement alone we 
owe all our pardon and peace, is here 
prominently set forth. Contrition, con- 
fession, restitution, all the feelings 
which accompany, and all the works 
which are meet for repentance, are in- 
dispensable J but it is faith in the atone- 
ment of Christ which justifies. Upon 
that alone must the penitent's hope be 
placed. While he weeps tears of grief 
and shame, while he renounces all his 
evil ways, while he strives to undo all 
the evil which he has previously done, 
the sacrifice of Christ must be looked to 
as the only meritorious cause, as the 
only appointed method of mercy. For 
this his earnest application must be 
made ; without this his professed re- 
pentance will avail him nothing. 



58 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



A 



CHAPTER VI. 
ND the Lord spake unto Mo- 



2 If a soul sin, and a commit a 

^ Numb. 6. 6. 

CHAPTER VI. 

The Trespass-offering for sins oflnjxis- 
tice, Fraud, Robbery j False-Dealing^ 

2. If a soul sin and commit a trespass. 
Gr. TTapiSojv irapiSr] rag £VTo)<ag l^vpiov, 
despising shall despise the command- 
ments of the Lord, In the Heb. the 
phraseology is the same as in ch. 5. 15. 
It may here be remarked, that the first 
seven verses of this chapter are in the 
original embraced within the preceding 
chapter, to which, perhaps, they more 

properly belong. U Against the Lord. 

Although all the instances specified re- 
late to om* neighbor, yet it is called 
a trespass against the Lord, because 
though the injury be done immediately 
to a fellow creature, yet an affront is 
thereby given to the Most High, whose 
authority has forbidden the wrong, and 
who has made the command of loving 
our neighbor second only to that of 

loving himself. IT That which was 

delivered him to keep. Heb. ^TlpS 
pikkadon. ' From the present text we 
learn, incidentally, that when a person 
denied that he had received a deposit, 
and no proof of his having done so could 
be adduced, he was obliged to take an 
oath to that effect: but if he swore 
falsely, and afterwards repented of hav- 
ing done so, the sin-offering and restitu- 
tion to the injured party afforded him 
an opportunity of atonement, wdthout 
incurring the extent of punishment to 
which he would have been liable had 
the crime been judicially proved. The 
law is too distinctly announced in Exod. 
22. to require enlarged remark ; but as 
an important distinction concerning a 
deposited beast injured, or stolen from, 
the person with whom it was deposited, 
IS liable to escape notice, as stated in 



trespass against the Lord, and b He 
unto his neighbour in that c which 
was delivered him to keep, or in 

i> ch. 19. 11. Acts 5. 4. Col. 3. 9. c Exod. 
22. 7. 10. 



vv. 9-11 of that chapter, we may ob- 
serve, that if the animal were stolen, or 
met wuth an accident, when out at pas- 
ture, the depositary was allowed to 
clear himself by oath, and then the 
owner had no claim upon him ; but if it 
were stolen from his own premises, he 
was obliged to make restitution. This 
was obviously on the principle of its 
being more difficult to steal a beast 
from a house than any thing else ; and 
that as he might have had the profit 
arising from the use of it, so he ought 
to bear the loss arising from his neglect 
in looking after it, or from accident — 
which is of more rare occurrence, and 
often difficult to distinguish from neg- 
lect (see Michaelis, vol. 2. p. 375). 
The importance of distinct regulations 
on the subject of deposited property, 
has been strongly felt by all Oriental 
legislators ; and it proceeds from the 
fact that there were not at any time, 
and are not now, any of those responsi- 
ble banking establishments which in 
modern Europe afford such important 
facilities for the application, transfer, 
and security of property. Hence, when 
a man is apprehensive of oppression or 
robbery, or from another cause, wishes 
to secure his property, he has no other 
alternative than either to hide it in 
some place of concealment, or to put it 
in the hands of some irresponsible per- 
son, in whom he thinks he has cause to 
rely. So also, if a man wishes to leave 
his place of residence for a lime, he 
must either adopt one of these courses, 
or else, perhaps at a great sacrifice, 
turn his property into money or jev/els, 
and take it w^ith him, exposing it to all 
the dangers of the road ; which, in the 
East, are very imminent and great. 
Much risk attends all these alternatives. 
For individuals to prove unfaithful to 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VL 



59 



fellowship, or in a thing taken 
away by violence, or hath ^ deceiv- 
ed his neighbour ; 
3 Or e have found that which was 
lost, and lieth concerning it, and 
f sweareth falsely ; in any of all 

d Prov. 24. 28, and 26. 19. e Deut. 22. 
1, 2, 3. f Exod. 22. 11. ch. 19. 12. Jer. 7. 9. 
Zech. 5. 4. 

their trust, as to property deposited 
with them, is so very common a cir- 
cumstance, that a large proportion of 
the tales with which the Oriental story- 
tellers amuse or move their auditors, in 
coffee-houses and elsewhere, as well as 
of those which are written in hooks, 
turn upon the contrivances to which the 
owner of property is obliged to resort in 
order to recover it from the person to 
whom it has been intrusted. Men who 
would have remained honest under the 
ordinary circumstances of life are too 
often drawn aside from rectitude by the 
temptations of valuable property com- 
mitted to their trust. Continual expe- 
rience of this sort has had a very un- 
happy effect upon the moral feelings of 
Orientals. Men fear to confide in each 
other : and, in the case of property 
which persons desire to secure, they 
often prefer the hazards attending the 
other alternative of concealing it under 
ground, or in strange places, or even to 
build it up in the thick walls of their 
houses.' — Pict. Bib. IT Gr in fellow- 
ship. Heb. ^"^ rilOTi^rd bithsometh yad, 
in the putting of the hand. The original 
phrase occurring only here, seems to 
denote such a stipulation as takes place 
in copartnerships J where the hand of 
one party is given to the other in pledge 
of upright and honorable dealing. The 
term is applicable however to any mat- 
ter of dealing or traffic accompanied by 
a joining of hands. Gr. Trepi Koivwvias^ 
concerning society or fellowship, Chal. 
' Fellowship of the hand.' Some would 
render it a thing put or given into the 
hand J a deposit ; but this is expressed 
by the preceding word "\yXQt} pikkadon^ 



these that a man doeth, sinning 
therein : 

4 Then it shall be, because he 
hath sinned and is guilty, that he 
shall restore that which he took 
violently away, or the thing which 
he hath deceitfully gotten, or that 
which was delivered him to keep, 
or the lost thing which he found, 

that which is delivered to keep, render- 
ed in the Gr. irapaOriKT]^ and occurring 
2 Tim. 1 . 12, ^ I am persuaded that he is 
able to keep that which I have commit- 
ted unto him (^vapadrjKrj) against that 
day.' So again, 2 Tim. 1. 14, ^ That 
good thing which was committed unto 
thee (7rapaOr]Kr]) ^ keep.' 1 Tim. 6. 20, 
' Timothy, keep that which is com- 
mitted to thy trust (jrapaB-qKr]) ,'> 

IT Or in a thing taken by violence. Le 
Clerc rightly observes, that this signi- 
fies a case of extortion by force, where 
there was no witness at hand who could 
give evidence before the judge for the 
person robbed. The laws, therefore, 
Ex. 22. 7, 15, appear to refer to cases 
where the thing could be proved j but 
here to those in which the person in- 
jured could bring no proof against the 

offender. IT Or hath deceived his 

neighbor. Heb. ptD^ dsak, hath deceit- 
fully or fraudulently oppressed. That 
is, wronged him by false accusation, or 
any unjust means, especially by with- 
holding what was due, or extorting what 
was not. Of this sin Zaccheus cleared 
himself by a fourfold restitution, Luke 
19. 8. ^ Who,' says Maimonides, ^ is a 
deceitful oppressor ? He that hath his 
neighbor's goods in his hand, v/ith the 
owner's consent, and when they are de- 
manded again, he keeps the goods in his 
own hands by force, and returns them 
not V 

4. He shall restore^ fyc. It appears 
from Num. 5. 6, 7, that confession of 
the sin was required in this and all sim- 
ilar instances of trespass. It is to be 
recollected that by a previous law, Ex. 
22. 1 , 7, 9, when a person was guilty of 



60 



LEVITICUS, 



[B. C. 1490. 



5 Or all that about which he hath 
sworn falsely ; he shall even g re- 
store it in the principal, and shall 
add the fifth part more thereto, 
and give it unto him to whom it 
appertaineth, in the day of his tres- 
pass-offering. 

6 And he shall bring his trespass- 
offering unto the Lord, i^a ram 
without blemish out of the flock, 
with thy estimation for a trespass- 
offering, unto the priest : 

^ ch. 5. 16. Numb. 5. 7. 2 Sam. 12. 6, 
Luke 19. 8. ^ ^h. 5. 15. 

any of the offences here specified, and 
withholding confession was convicted 
of the same by witnesses in a court of 
law, he was required to make a four- 
fold restitution^ as we have shown in 
the Note on that passage. Here the 
mulct is lessened in consideration of a 
voluntary acknowledgment. He was 
to restore the principal with an addi- 
tional fifth part as a compensation to 
the owner for the wrong sustained by 
him. 

5. In the day of his trespass-offering. 
That is, in the day wherein he is 
found a trespasser, rendered by the Gr. 
TTi rjnepa £^syxO]}, in the day wherein he 
is convicted or reprehended ; or it may 
be understood as in our present version, 
the day wherein his trespass- offering 
was presented. The requisite restitu- 
tion was not to be delayed. 

The Law of the Burnt-offering, 
9. This is the law of the burnt-offer- 
ing. That is, this is the daily burnt- 
offering or perpetual sacrifice, consisting 
of two lambs offered upon the altar of 
burnt- offering, one in the morning and 
the other in the evening. That of the 
morning was offered about sunrise, after 
the incense was burnt upon the golden 
altar, and before any other sacrifice. 
That of the evening was offered in the 
decline of day, before the night began. 
They were both wholly consumed on 
the altar, after the same manner as the 



7 iAnd the priest shall make an 
atonement for him before the Lord: 
and it shall be forgiven him for any 
thing of all that he hath done in 
trespassing therein. 

8 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

9 Command Aaron and his sons, 
saying, This is the law of the burnt- 
offering: it is the burnt- offering, 
because of the burning upon the 
altar all night unto the morning, 

i ch. 4. 26. 

free-will burnt- oflfering, but by a slow 
fire, that they might continue the longer 
burning. With each of the victims was 
oflfered a bread-offering and a drink-of- 
fering of strong wine (see Num. 28. 
6-7.), the latter being poured out before 
the Lord, or about the altar, as a liba- 
tion. The Jewish writers consider that 
the morning sacrifice made atonement 
for the sins of the preceding night, and 
that of the evening for the sins of the 
preceding day. It may be regarded as 
a daily expression of national as well 
as individual repentance, prayer, and 
thanksgiving. — Moses having hitherto 
given instructions directed more espe- 
cially to the people, and pointing out 
their duties in respect to their sacred 
oblations, now enters upon those which 
had particular reference to the priests^ 
who were charged with the oversight 
of all the sacrifices and services of 
their religion. IT Because of the burn- 
ing ; or as it may be rendered, ' It is that 
which ascendeth by burning.' It seems 
to be designed to give a reason of the 
name, which is in Heb. {1^15^ olah, as- 
cension, from its all being burnt and 
ascending in smoke and flame. The 
words at the same time explain what 
burnt-offering he means, viz. the daily 
sacrifice, which was the principal of 
this kind of offerings, and regulated all 

the rest. ^ The fire of the altar shall 

be burning in (on) it. Heb. Hpl^) 
tukad, shall be made to burn ; as the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VI. 



61 



' and the fire of the altar shall be 
burning in it. 

10 kAnd the priest shall put on 
his linen garment, and his linen 
breeches shall he put upon his 
flesh, and take up the ashes which 
the fire hath consumed with the 
burnt-offering on the altar, and he 
shall put them i beside the altar. 

11 And m he shall put off his gar- 
ments, and put on other garments, 

k ch- 16. 4. Exo(L 28. 39, 40, 41, 43. 
Ezek. 44. 17, IS. l ch. 1. 16. "» Ezek. 44. 19. 

result of special care j shall be continu- 
ally nourished. 

10. Shall put on his linen garment. 
Heb, i:: ^n;a middo had, Gr. x^^"^« 
\ivovv, his linen coat. The original 
word 1"i)3 middo is a derivative from 
m?2 mddad, to measure, and implies a 
garment commensurate to the body, and 
therefore one of considerable size. ' It 
is the coat,' says Sol. Jarchi, ^ and the 
scripture calleth it Middo, because it 
was like his measure (Middatho) that 
wore it.' The^Heb. word for ' linen' 
(^i had) signifies a finer kind of linen 
than that made of the common flax, for 
which another term is employed, and 
therefore the Chal. here renders it by 
* garments of Bysse,' of which see Note 

on Ex. 25. 4. IT Shall put on other 

garments. That is, either their com- 
mon garments, or, as some of the Jew- 
ish commentators understand, other 
holy garments. The garments which 
the priests wore in the sanctuary they 
were not allov/ed to wear elsewhere, 
Ezek. 44. 17, 19, ' And it shall come to 
pass that when they shall enter in at 
the gates of the inner court, they shall 
be clothed with linen garments. And 
when they go forth into the outer court, 
even into the outer court of the people, 
they shall put ofi' their -garments where- 
in they ministered, and lay them in the 
holy chambers, and they shall put on 
other garments ; and they shall not 
sanctify the people with their garments.' 
6 



and carry forth the ashes without 
the camp n unto a clean place. 

12 And the fire upon the altar 
shall be burning in it ; it shall not 
be put out : and the priest shall 
burn wood on it every morning, 
and lay the burnt-off*ering in order 
upon it ; and he shall burn thereon 
otlie fat of the peace-off*erings. 

13 The fire shall ever be burning 
upon the altar ; it shall never go 
out. 

n ch. 4. 12. ch. 3. 3, 9, 14. 



U Without the camp unto a clean 

place. This indicated that some de- 
gree of holiness attached to the ashes 
as the relics of a sacrifice which had 
its accomplishment in the sufferings 
and death of Christ. 

12. The fire upon the altar shall he 
hurning. Heb. IpllT. tukad, shall he 
kindled or made to hum. Although 
the fire that consumed the sacrifices 
originally came down from heaven, yet 
it was to be kept perpetually burning 
by a supply of fuel. This fuel was to 
be exclusively of wood, a store of which 
was provided at the expense of the 
whole congregation ; and as every thing 
pertaining to the service of God was to 
be of the best, so the wood according to 
the Hebrews, was to be of the choicest 
quality ; that which was worm-eaten 
being instantly rejected, as also that 
which was obtained from the timber of 
old demolished buildings, none being 
admitted but that which was perfectly 
sound. In imitation of this perpetual 
fire, the ancient Persian Magi, and their 
descendants the Parsees, kept also a 
fire constantly burning ; the latter con- 
tinue it to the present day. Traces of 
the same custom are to be found among 
almost all heathen nations. Indeed it 
can scarcely be doubted that the Greek 
' Estia ' and the Roman ' Vesta,' goddess 
of fire, owed their origin to a Hebrew 
source, in which language IDJ^ esh, 
Chal. esha, signifies yire. 



62 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



14 H pAnd this is the law of the 
meat-offering. The sons of Aaron 
shall offer it before the Lord, be- 
fore the altar. 

15 And he shall take of it his 
handful, of the flour of the meat- 
offering, and of the oil thereof, 
and all the frankincense which is 
upon the meat-off*ering, and shall 
burn it upon the altar /or a sweet 
savour, eve7i the q memorial of it, 
unto the Lord. 

16 And rthe remainder thereof 
shall Aaron and his sons eat ; 
s with unleavened bread shall it be 
eaten in the holy place ; in the 
court of the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation they shall eat it. 

Pch. 2. 1. Numb. 15. 4. <i ch. 2- 2,9. 
r ch. 2. 3- Ezek. 44. 29. ^ yer. 26. ch. 10. 
12, 13. Numb. 13. 10. 



The Law of the Meat-offering. 
14. This is the law of the meat-offer- 
ing. Heb. T\T\yi2 min^hahj of which 
see Note on Lev. 2. 1-3. This precept 
respects not the meat-offering which 
w^as to accompany the daily bm-nt-of- 
fering-, but that which was offered alone 
us a i'ree- will-offering, and in place of a 
voluntary burnt-offering of greater va- 
lue, as described Lev. 2. 1-3. The sum 
of the directions here given is, that no 
leaven should ever be mixed with such 
bread or cakes ; that after a small part 
of it had been burnt upon the altar as 
God's portion^ the priests in waiting 
were to have the remainder, and that 
this was to be eaten in the court of the 
tabernacle and nowhere else — in all 
which particulars the precept corres- 
ponds to that given relative to the parts 
of the sin and trespass-offerings that 

accrued to the priests. IF The sons 

of Aaron shall offer it. That is, in 
rotation, one at a time. The phrase 
^ sons of Aaron' may here be taken in 
its literal sense, but in after-time this 
expression meant the sziccessors of 
Aaron in the holy office, Comp. v. 20. 



17 tit shall not be baken with 
leaven. ^ I have given it un,to 
them for their portion of my offer- 
ings made by fire, ^it is most 
holy, as is the sin-off*ering, and as 
the trespass-off'ering. 

18 y All the males among the 
children of Aaron shall eat of it. 
z It shall be a statute for ever in 
your generations concerning the 
offerings of the Lord made by fire : 
a every one that toucheth them 
shall be holy. 

19 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

20 b This is the off'ering of Aaron 
and of his sons, which they shall 



t ch. 2. 11. 'J Numb. 18. 9, 19. ^ ver. 25. 
ch. 2. 3. and 7. 1. Exod. 29. 37. v ver. 29. 
Numb. 18. 10. z ch. 3. 17. * ch. 22. 3, 4, 5, 
6, 7. Exod. 29. 37. b Exod. 29. 2. 



16. With unleavened bread shall it 
be eaten. The insertion of the word 
^with' in this place, which does not 
occur in the original, obscures the true 
sense. The meaning is, not that the 
remainder of the meat-offering was to 
be eaten by the priests with the addi- 
tion of unleavened cakes, but that the 
meal itself was to be ?nade into unlea^ 

vened cakes, and thus eaten. IF In 

the holy place. This phrase denotes in 
this connexion, contrary to its ordinary 
import, the court of the tabernacle 
where all the holy things were boiled, 
baked, dressed and eaten by the Levit- 
ical order, who ministered at the altar. 

18. Every one that toucheth them. 
Or Heb. 5>:i'^ "llTi^ ^^D kol asher yigga, 
all that toucheth ; implying things as 
well as persons. The meaning is, that 
no unclean person or common vessel 
of ministry might touch them. Gr. 
TTas bs cav arp-qraL avrcov ayiagdrjaeTat, 
whosoever toucheth them shall be sanc- 
tified. ' The meaning is,' says Chaz- 
kuni, ' that he shall purify himself be- 
fore he touch them ; and that any vessel 
or implement to be used about them 
shall first be sanctified.' Junius, how- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VI. 



63 



offer unto the Lord m the day 
when he is anointed ; the tenth 
part of an c ephah of fine flour for 
a meat-offering perpetual, half of 
it in tlie morning, and half thereof 
at night. 

21 In a pan it shall be made with 
oil ; and when it is baken, thou 
shalt bring it in ; and the baken 
pieces of the meat-offering shalt 
thou offer /or a sweet savour unto 
the Lord. 

22 And the priest of his sons 

c Exod. 16. 36. 



' touching > 



ever, contends that the 

refers wholly to persons, and not to 

things, because it comes in as a reason 

for the eating of them being confined to 

Aaron's sons ; while Hesychius ascribes 

the sanctification to the touch. Comp. 

V.27. 

The Offering at the Consecration of a 
Priest. 
20. In the day when he is anointed. 
From the obvious import of the pre- 
cept, we should naturally understand 
that this offering, called by the Jews 
< the meal-offering of initiation or con- 
secration,' was to be presented only on 
the day in which any one of the high 
priests' line was inducted into office ; 
but it is maintained by several of the 
Hebrew commentators that the high 
priest was bound to offer it daily, be- 
ginning from the day in which he was 
anointed, and continuing it through the 
whole period of his office ; so that, 
according to them, ^ in the day ' is 
equivalent to ^ from the day.' Josephus 
also says, ' The high priest sacrificed 
twice every day at his own charges, and 
that this was his sacrifice.' It is, how- 
ever, doubtful whether such a construc- 
tion can fairly be put upon the passage. 
It may be called ' a meal-offering per- 
petual,' from its being always statedly 
ofiered at the High Priests' initiation 
into office. From this we may under- 
stand what is intended by its being said 



d that is anointed in his stead shall 
offer it : It is a statute for ever 
unto the Lord ; e it shall be wholly 
burnt. 

23 For every meat-offering for 
the priest shall be wholly burnt : 
it shall not be eaten. 

24 1[ And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

25 Speak unto Aaron and to his 
sons, saying, f This is the law of 
the sin-offering : g In the place 

d ch. 4. 3. e Exod. 29. 26. f ch. 4. 2. 
& ch. 1. 3, 5, 11, and 4. 24, 29, 33. 



that this is ' the offering of Aaron and 
his sons, and that they should offer it,' 
&c. It is not that he and they should 
offer it together J but Aaron now, and 
his sons successively in after times, as 
they were inducted in turn into the 
priestly dignity. 

23. It shall not he eaten. In this res- 
pect it differed from the other meal- 
offering. The Priest's offering must be 
all burnt, because, although he figura- 
tively bore the sins of the people, yet 
there was no one to bear his sins, nor 
could he bear them himself There 
was, moreover, a general rule (v. 30), 
against the eating of any sacrifice, the 
blood of which was brought within the 
tabernacle ; and such were the offerings 
of the Priest and the Congregation. 
See Note on v. SO. 

The Law of the Sin-offering. 
25, This is the law of the sin-offer- 
ing. The directions here given are 
mainly a repetition of those contained 
Lev. 4. 24-31, but with these additional 
circumstances, viz. that none but con- 
secrated persons or things should touch 
any part of it after it was once devoted 
to God, but especially the blood that was 
spilled for the atonement of the offerer. 
And with a view to preserve the strict- 
est regard to holy things, if any of its 
blood at the time of the slaughter should 
chance to dash upon the robes even of 
the priest in waiting, it was to be wash- 



64 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



where the humt-offering is killed 
shall the sin-offering be killed be- 
fore the Lord : lut is most holy. 

26 iThe priest that offereth it 
for sin shall eat it : ^ in the holy 
place shall it be eaten, in the court 
of the tabernacle of the congrega- 
tion. 

27 1 Whatsoever shall touch the 



h ver. 17. ch. 21. 22. i ch. 10. 17, 18. 

Numb. IS. 9, 10. Ezek. 44. 28, 29. k ver. 16. 
1 Exod. 29. 37, and 30. 29. 



ed out ; but particularly if it fell upon 
the clothes of the offerer, it was to be 
most carefully cleansed. If it were 
sprinkled upon any earthen vessel into 
which it would sink deep, and not be 
easily rubbed out, such vessel was to be 
broken and laid by : and if upon a ves- 
sel of brass, which from its hardness 
\7Duld be less apt to imbibe the liquid, 
it was to be well scoured and rinsed. 
All this went to shadow forth the con- 
tagion of sin, and the constant care re- 
quisite to cleanse ourselves by repent- 
ance and faith from its polluting stains. 
Of this truth the ancient Hebrew doc- 
tors seem to have had a clear percep- 
tion, as R. Menahem says, in speaking 
of this washing of garments, that the 
reason of it was, * that it was necessary 
to do away uncleanness by the waters 

that are on high.' IT In the place 

where the burnt-offering is killed shall 
the sin-offering ie killed. That was 
on the north side of the altar. Lev. 1.11. 
* Thereby was figured,' says Ainsworth, 
< that Christ, our Sin-offering, should be 
crucified on Mount Cavalry, which was 
on the north-west side of Jerusalem ; as 
by the Jews' tradition the morning 
sacrifice w^as killed at the north-west 
horn of the altar.' 

26. The priest that offereth it for 
sin. Heb. "Mi^ Js^ton^^n yi^H hakkohen 
ham''hatt'eotho, the priest that expiateth- 
sin-by-it. Chal. ' That maketh atone- 
ment by the blood thereof.' Gr. 
ava<hcpo^v^ that offereth. The phraseolo- 
gy is remarkable from the fact that the 



flesh thereof shall be holy : and 
when there is sprinkled of the 
blood thereof upon any garment, 
thou shalt wash that whereon it 
was sprinkled in the holy place. 
28 But the earthen vessel wherein 
it is sodden m shall be broken : and 
if it be sodden in a brazen pot, it 
shall be both scoured, and rinsed 



m water. 



m ch. 11.33, and 15. 12. 



original word comes from the same root 
as tli^tori ^hatadh, sin or sin-offering. 
In the Piel form, which here occurs, it 
is defined by Gesenius, to offer as a sin- 
offering^ to make atonement^ to expiate, 
to cleanse persons or things by a sacred 
rite. 

21. Whatsoever shall touch the blood 
thereof J 8fC. That is, the blood of the 
sin-offering, whether it were that which 
was to be eaten, or that which was to 
be burnt — a rite peculiar to the sin- 
offering above all the other most holy 
things. As this sacrifice has especial 
respect to Christ, who was made sin for 
us, so this direction may perhaps point 
to the reverential and holy use that is 
to be made of the mystery of our re- 
demption, of which those that are made 
partakers ought to be washed, cleansed, 
and sanctified j to possess the vessels 
of their bodies in holiness and honor ; 
and not to yield their members as in- 
struments of unrighteousness unto in- 
iquity. 

28. The earthen vessel wherein it was 
sodden shall be broken. ' This is a very 
remarkable instruction. We all know 
that earthen vessels are broken, and 
others thoroughly scoured, w^hen sup- 
posed to be defiled, among the Moham- 
medans and Hindoos, as they were also 
among the Jews. But the present in- 
stance is of a different character. The 
earthen vessel was to be broken, and 
the copper one scoured and rinsed, not 
because they were defiled, but because 
the flesh of the sin-offering having been 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VI. 



65 



29 nAU the males among the 
priests shall eat thereof: ©it is 
most holy. 

30 p And no sin-offering, whereof 



n ver. 


18. 


Numb. 


IS. 


10. 


ver. 25 


. p 


ch. 


4.7, 


11, 


1-2, 


IS, 21, 


aud 


10. 


18. 


and 


16. 


27. 


Heb 


13 


11. 

















cooked in them, they had thus become 
too sacred for common use. We shall 
elsewhere have occasion to remark on 
instances in which earthen utensils 
were broken, and others scoured in con- 
sequence of defilement. At present we 
only direct attention to the fact, that at 
this time the culinary vessels of the 
Hebrews seem to have been exclusively 
of earthenware or copper. Iron, though 
known to them, was at this time very 
little in use for any purpose, and even 
when they became better acquainted 
Avith that valuable metal it is doubtful 
if their culinary or other vessels w^ere 
ever made of it. At least, no pot, pan, 
or other vessel is said in all the Scrip- 
ture to be of iron. What is translated 
' iron pan,' in Ezek. 4. 3, is properly an 
' iron plate,' as the context alone suffi- 
ciently indicates. In point of fact, the 
culinary and other domestic vessels 
throughout the East remain to this day, 
as we find them thus early in the Mo- 
saic history, either of copper, earthen- 
ware, or wood (ch. 11. 38; 14. 12), 
although no doubt the quality and man- 
ufacture have much improved. The 
writer, in the course of journeys and 
residence in different parts of Western 
Asia, does not think that he ever met 
with an instance of a cooking vessel of 
any other metal than copper : and dishes 
and bowls of the same metal tinned are 
those w^hich most usually make their 
appearance on the tables of kings and 
great men. When luxury desires some- 
thing more rich and costly for the table 
than copper, it finds indulgence, not in 
silver and gold, but in china and fine 
earthenware.' — Pict. Bib. 

30. A7id no sin-offering ivhereof, 8fC. 
We see from Lev. 4. 5, 16, that the 
6* 



any of the blood is brought into the 
tabernacle of the congregation to 
reconcile withal in the holy place^ 
shall be eaten : it shall be burnt in 
the fire. 



blood of the sin-offerings for the high 
priest and the congregation was brought 
into the tabernacle, and consequently 
they were not to be eaten, but to be 
burnt, as we learn was the fact, Lev. 4. 
12,21. As it appears from Lev. 10. 17, 
that the eating of the offerings of the 
people was in a sense typical of the 
bearing and expiating their sins, this 
precept tended to show the intrinsic 
inability of the Levitical priesthood to 
procure a compJete reconciliation of 
men to God. This will be more evident 
from viewing the passage in its evan- 
gehcal connexions. The apostle, Heb. 
13. 10-13, says, ^ We have an altar, 
whereof they have no right to eat which 
serve the tabernacle. For the bodies 
of those beasts, whose blood is brought 
into the sanctuary by the high priest 
for sin, are burned without the camp. 
Wherefore Jesus also, that he might 
sanctify the people with his own blood, 
suffered without the gate. Let us go 
forth therefore unto him without the 
camp, bearing his reproach.' Now it 
is to be recollected, that under the law 
the blood of such sacrifices as were 
eaten by the priests came not into the 
sanctuary ; which argued the unworthi- 
ness and incompetency of those sacri- 
fices to answer the end of a perfect 
atonement. But Christ, with his blood 
shed for our sins, entered into the holy 
place, not that which was made with 
hands, but into heaven itself, and there- 
by obtained eternal redemption for us, 
Heb. 9. 11, 12, 24. This great sacrifice 
therefore does away the availableness 
of the Levitical offerings. As the 
priests of the law were forbidden to eat 
of the propitiatory sacrifices whose 
blood was carried within the vail, but 



66 



LEVITICUS. 



IB. C. 1490. 



were commanded to burn them entirely 
without the camp, what right can they 
have, while they adhere to the legal 
institution, to partake of Christ's sacri- 
fice ? If they continue to adhere to the 
legal services of the tabernacle, they 
virtually renounce the benefit of the 
sacrifice of Christ. Indeed, the apostle 
would intimate, that the Levitical 
priesthood is necessarily abolished, for 
there is now nothing on which the 
priests can live, if not upon that altar 
on which they are to feed by faith. 
This he proves thus : The bodies of 
those beasts whose blood was brought 
into the sanctuary by the high priest, 
were burnt without the camp. Conse- 
quently there was nothing left of them 
for their sustenance. But these sacri- 
fices were a most significant type of the 
sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ, 
who has become the substance of the 
legal shadows. What then shall the 
priests eat? Upon what shall they 
live, if not by faith upon the great pro- 
pitiation ? What other altar but the 
Christian altar remains? And what 
right can they have to this, if they ad- 
here to the Jewish ? 

Remarks. — (2.) No sentiment should 
be more deeply engraven upon our 
hearts than that a sin against our 
neighbor is a trespass against God. So 
David sa^^s, ^ Against thee, thee only 
have I sinned, and done this evil in thy 
sight,' though his offence was primarily 
committed against Uriah. 

(3.) ' Or have found that which was 
lost.' The judgment of every honest 
mind is, that he who finds any lost pro- 
perty, and makes not all due inquiry to 
ascertain the owner, should in equity 
be treated as a thief. 

(5, 6.) ^ Shall bring his trespass- 
ofiering unto the Lord, a ram without 
blemish.' By this precept we are again 
taught that disobedience to God is the 
great evil even of those crimes which 
arc injurious to man, and that repent- 
ance, and even restitution, though need- 



ful, in order to forgiveness, cannot atone 
for sin. 

(12.) As the priest was to renew the 
fire upon the altar every morning, and 
to guard with the utmost care against 
its going out, so our first work with the 
return of the morning light, should be 
that the fire of holy love be kindled 
afresh in our hearts, and through the 
day our study should be to keep it con- 
stantly burning. 

(22.) « And the priest shall offer it.' 
The benefits of Christ's atonement, in 
order to be available, must be personally 
apprehended. However intrinsically 
suflicient for the salvation of all men, 
none will be the better for it who do 
not for themselves make use of it. The 
offending priest, or ruler, or comm.ou 
person, must himself bring his sin-offer- 
ing, must lay his own hands upon its J 
head, must thus show how nearly he 
felt himself to be concerned in the cere- 
mony j and every sinner now must in- 
dividually bring this sacrifice of Christ, 
in faith, as the atonement for his own 
sin. He must not rest in the mere 
generality that ' we are all sinners,' 
and ^ Christ died for all.' He must feel 
and apply all this to himself. He must 
in effect say, ' Lord, I am indeed a sin- 
ner ; a great and grievous sinner against 
thee ', but here is my sin-offering ; here 
is the sacrifice of thine own blessed 
Son ; here is the atonement of thine ap- 
pointment ; this I bring to thee with my 
soul's approval, and my heart's desire 
that it may be accepted by thee, and 
put away all my sin.' 



CHAPTER VIL 

Additional Rules and Distinctions rela- 
tive to the Trespass-offerings, 

1 . This is the law of the trespass-offer- 
ing. In the Heb. simply tS'^TJ^n n'miTl 
torath hcidsham, the law of the trespass. 
Gr. h vo^og Tov Kpiov rov rrspt TrXry^w^cXctac, 
the law of the ram for trespass. It is a 
law for the direction of the priests in 
the discharge of their office relative to 



{ : 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VII. 



67 



CHAPTER VII. 

LIKEWISE a this IS the law of 
the trespass-offering: ^it is 
most holy. 

2 c In the place where they kill 
the burnt-offering shall they kill 
the trespass-offering: and the blood 
thereof shall he sprinkle round 
about upon the altar. 

3 And he shall offer of it ^all the 
fat thereof; the rump, and the fat 
that covereth the inwards, 

4 And the two kidneys, and the 
fat that is on them, which is by 
the flanks, and the caul that is 



a ch. 5. and 6. 1—7. ^ ch. 6. 17, 25, and 
21. 22. c ch. 1. 3, 5, 11, and 4. 24, 29, 33. 
d ch. 3. 4, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, and 4. 8. 9. Exod. 
29. 13. 



the Trespass-offering.- ^ It is most 

holy. Heb. ^IH d^lU^p U3"jp kodesh 
kodoshim hoo, it is holiness ofholinesses. 
The design is to convey a general sig- 
nificant intimation in regard to the na- 
ture of these offerings. They, as well 
as the Sin-offerings, were to be ranked 
in their estimation among the 'most 
holy things,' and practically treated 
accordingly. Comp. v. 6. 

2. The blood thereof shall he sprinkle 
round about upon the altar. The rites 
in regard to the Sin and the Trespass- 
offering were for the most part the 
same, but there was this difference as to 
the disposal of the blood, viz. that the 
blood of the Trespass-offering here men- 
tioned was to be sprinkled round the 
altar, whereas that of the Sin-offering 
was to be put upon the horns of the 
altar. Ch. 4. 25, 34. This moreover 
was to be a male^ the other might be a 
female sacrifice. This was always for 
a single person, but a Sin-offering might 
be for the whole congregation. Lev. 
4. 13. 

4. The fat that is on them. That is, 
chiefly the fat that was found in a de- 
tached state ^ not mixed with the muscles. 

6, Every male among the priests shall 



above the liver, with the kidneys, 
it shall he take away : 

5 And the priest shall burn them 
upon the altar for an offering made 
by fire unto the Lord: it is a tres- 
pass-offering. 

6 e Every male among the priests 
shall eat thereof: it shall be eaten 
in the holy place : fit is most holy. 

7 As the sin-offering is, so is g the 
trespass-offering : there is one law 
for them: the priest that maketh 
atonement therewith shall have it. 

8 And the priest that offereth 
any man's burnt-offering, even the 
priest shall have to himself the 
skin of the burnt-offering which he 
hath offered. 

e ch. 6. 16, 17, 18. Numb. 18. 9. 10. f ch. 
2. 3. s ch. 6. 25, 26, and 14. 13. 

eat thereof. All the fat being offered to 
God, the flesh became the portion of the 
priest, who, with his male children, was 
to eat it, but only within the precincts 
of the sanctuary. 

7. There is one law for them. The 
import is, that what has been omitted 
in the explanation of the Sin-offering 
must be learned from that of the Tres- 
pass-offering, and vice versa. IT Shall 

have it. That is, by synecdoche, that 
part of it which was by the divine con- 
stitution allowed to the priest. 

8. The priest shall have to himself 
the skin. All the flesh of the burnt- 
offerings being consumed as well as the 
fat, there could nothing fall to the share 
of the priest but the skin ; which must 
have been very valuable, as they were 
used as mattresses, and probably as car- 
pets to sit upon in the day, as they are 
still used by some of the inhabitants 
and the dervishes of the East. See 
Harmer's observations, vol. L p. 236. 
Bp. Patrick remarks upon this passage, 
that ' It is probable that Adam himself 
offered the first sacrifice, and had the 
skin given him by God, to make gar- 
ments for him and his wife ; in conform- 
ity to which the priests ever after had 



68 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



9 And ^ all the meat-offerin£^ that 
is baken in the oven, and all that 
is dressed in the frying-pan, and in 
the pan, shall be the priest's that 
offereth it. 

10 And every meat-offering min- 
gled with oil, and dry, shall all the 
sons of Aaron have, one as much 
as another. 

11 And Uhis is the law of the 

^ ch. 2. 3. 10. Numb. IS. 9. Ezek. 44.29. 
i ch. 3. 1, and 22. 18. 21. 

the skin of the whole burnt-offering for 
their portion : which was a custom 
among the Gentiles as well as the Jews, 
who gave the skins of their sacrifices to 
the priests when they were not burnt 
with the sacrifices.' 

9, 10. And all the meat-offerings. 
That is, all the baked or fried meat- 
offerings, with the exception of that 
part called the ^ memorial,' ch.2. 4-10, 
and which was to be burnt upon the 
altar, was to go to the particular priest 
that offered it ; but in the case of the 
raw flour-offerings of that kind, the 
remainder was to be equally shared by 
all the priests in attendance. 

Additional Rules respecting the Peace- 
offerings. 
11. And this is the law, ^-c. Direc- 
tions had previously been given, ch. 3. 
to the people, regulating this kind of 
ofierings when presented by them ; but 
in this connexion more specific orders 
are given to the priests on the same 
subject. The reason of this was, that 
as there were several S07'ts of peace- 
offerings, so there were various rites to 
be observed in regard to them — rites 
which are here called ^ the law of the 
peace-offerings.' In the order in which 
the different offerings are spoken of in 
ch. 3. the peace-offering occurs the 
third ; but m that chapter the law of 
peace-offerings is no further stated than 
as it accords with the burnt-offering, 
and the fuller statement is reserved for 
the passage before us. Hence, in the 



sacrifice of peace-offerings, which 
he shall offer unto the Lord. 

12 If he offer it for a thanksgiv- 
ing, then he shall offer with the 
sacrifice of thanksgiving unleaven- 
ened cakes mingled with oil, and 
unleavened wafers k anointed with 
oil, and cakes mingled with oil, of 
fine flour, dried. 

13 Besides the cakes, he shall 
offer for his offering, Ueavened 

k ch. 2. 4. Numb. 6. 15. i Amos 4. 5. 

enumeration of the different offermgs in 
V. 37, the peace-offering is fitly-men- 
tioned last. U Which he shall offer. 

The word ' he ' here has no express 
antecedent. It should be rendered ac- 
cording to the frequent idiom of the 
Hebrew, ' which one shall offer,' or 
* which shall be offered.' See Note on 
Lev. 1.5. 

1. The Eucharistic Peace-offering. 

12, 13. If he offer it for a thanks- 
giving. Heb. rnin 5d5> al todah, for a 
confession. Gr. irepL aweaecog, for praise. 
That is, in token of gratitude for special 
mercies and favors received, such as 
recovery from sickness, preservation in 
a journey, deliverance at sea, redemp- 
tion from captivity, all of which are 
specified in Psalm 107, and for them 
men are called upon to ofier the sacri- 
fice of thanksgiving. In allusion to this 
kind of offering the apostle says, Heb. 
13. 15, ' By him, therefore, let us offer 
the sacrifice of praise to God continu- 
ally.' In regard to oblations of this 
kind, the precept is, that along with 
the bullock, goat, or sheep, the offerer 
should present pancakes mixed with 
pure oil, but unleavened, inasmuch as 
part of them was to be offered up to 
God with the fat upon the aitar, where 
leaven was entirely prohibited. Still 
leaven was not excluded from another 
part of the offering, viz. that of the 
bread of the priests, which was not 
burnt upon the altar. The occasion of 
the offering, it is to be recollected, was 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER Vn. 



69 



bread, with the sacrifice of thanks- 
giving of his peace-offerings. 

14 And of it he shall offer one 
out of the whole oblation for an 
heave-offering unto the Lord, 
^ and it shall be the priest's that 
sprinkleth the blood of the peace- 
oiferings. 

m Numb. 18. 8, 11, 19. 

one of gratitude, praise, and rejoicing; 
and on such an occasion God would 
kindly allow a more palatable species 
of food for his servants, and accept at 
his own table the same bread which 
they -were wont to use at theirs. 

14. Of it he shall offer one. Heb. 
1!]^^ mimmenu, of it ; i. e. of the 
bread, one of the leavened cakes or 
loaves before-mentioned, v/hich was to 
be presented to God as a heave-offering. 
When this was done, all that remained 
was the portion of the priest who 
sprinkled the blood of the peace-offer- 
ings on the altar. U For an heave- 
offering. Heb. n^'llln tei'umah, from 
the root d1^ rfim, to lift up ; so called 
from its being heaved or lifted up on 
high) in token that it was thereby 
directed to the God of heaven, and 
devoutly proffered to his acceptance. 
Gr. and Chal. ' A separation, or sepa- 
rated thing.-' For a full account of 
this kind of offering se^ Note on Ex. 
29. 24, 28. 

15. Shall he eaten the same day that it 
is offered. The reason of this injunc- 
tion, which was observed in most of the 
sacred feasts, especially the passover, 
may be learned from the following ap- 
propriate extract from Philo : — ' It was 
not ftt that those holy things should be 
put into their cupboards, but immedi- 
ately set before those who were in 
need ; for they were no longer his who 
offered them, but his to whom they 
were offered ; v/ho being himself most 
liberal and bountiful, would have guests 
invited to his table to partake with those 
who offered the sacrifice. And these 
he would not have to look upon them- 



15 nAnd theiiesh of the sacrifice 
of his peace-offerings for thanks- 
giving shall be eaten the same day 
that it is offered ; he shall not 
leave any of it until the morning. 

16 But oif the sacrifice of his 
offering be a vow, or a voluntary 

" ch. 22. 30. ch. 19. 6, 7, 8. 

selves as masters of the feast, for they 
are but ministers of the feast, not mas- 
ters or entertainers j that belongs to 
God himself, whose bounty ought not to 
be concealed by preferring sordid par- 
simony before generous humanity.' 
His meaning obviously is, that all the 
sacrifice was God's, who graciously 
granted to him V\^ho offered it a part of 
it v^^ith v^^hich to entertain his friends 
and the poor, whom he would have to 
be invited forthwith, that no part of it 
might be perverted to any other than 
the designed use. Add to this, that in 
a country like Palestine, it was apt to 
putrify ; and as it was considered to 
be holy, it would be very improper to 
expose that to putrefaction which had 
been consecrated to the Divine Being. 

2. The Votive J or Voluntary Peace- 
offering. 
16. If the sacrifice of his offering he 
a vow. This was the second kind of 
peace-offerings contemplated in this 
part of the law. They were such as 
were either simply and unconditionally 
devoted v/ithout special respect to any 
past or future favor j or such as wera 
vowed upon a condition, as when Jacob 
pledged himself. Gen. 28. 20-22^ saying, 
' If God will be with me, and will keep 
me in this way that I go, and will give 
me bread to eat and raiment to put on, 
so that I come again to my father's 
house in peace : then shall the Lord be 
my God, and this stone which I have 
set for a pillar shall be God's house ; 
and of all that thou shalt give me I will 
surely give the tenth unto thee.' The 
principal point in which they differed 



70 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



offering, it shall be eaten the same 
day that he offereth his sacrifice : 
and on the morrow also the re- 
mainder of it shall be eaten : 

17 But the remainder of the flesh 
of the sacrifice on the third day 
shall be burnt with fire. 



from the preceding consisted in this, 
that the offerer and his friends were 
required immediately to begin to feast 
upon the sacrifice, that they might, if 
possible, eat the whole of it on that 
day ; but if this were not easily practi- 
cable, then they might defer the re- 
mainder till the second day. But the 
indulgence was never to be extended 
beyond that time. Should any of it 
remain till the third day it was to be 
burnt ; and should the offerer presume 
to eat the least part of it then, it would 
not only disannul the effect of his sacri- 
fice, but render him unclean and guilty 
to a high degree. Something analogous 
to this obtained in the heathen worship. 
Bochart shows from Macrobius, that 
the Romans had a sacrifice called ' Pro- 
tervia,' in which it was the custom, if 
any thing of the feast remained, to have 
it consumed in the fire. {Hierozoic 
Sac. .p. l,c.50.) — ^ As the people of the 
East generally cat their meat the same 
day on which it is killed, and almost 
never later than the second day, we are 
inclined to concur in the view of Harmer 
{' Observations,' vol. i. p. 457) who 
thinks that this regulation was intended 
to preclude any attempt to preserve the 
meat, by potting or otherwise, so that it 
might be taken to different parts of the 
country, and used superstitiously, per- 
haps, as peculiarly holy food, or applied 
in some way inconsistent with the in- 
tention of the law. That intention was, 
that what became the offerer's share of 
the sacrifice he had presented, he should 
eat cheerfully before the Lord with his 
friends, and that the poor and destitute 
should partake in the benefit. This 
object was ensured by the regulation 



18 And if any of the flesh of the 
sacrifice of his peace-offerings be 
eaten at all on the third day, it 
shall not be accepted, neither shall 
it be p imputed unto him that offer- 
eth it: it shall be an qabomina- 

P Numb. IS. 27. q ch. 11. 10, 11, 41, and 
19.7. 

which precluded the meat from being 
kept beyond the second day.' — Fid. Bib. 

IT A voluntary offering^ or Heb. 

ni^lD nedabah. a free-will offering ; 
i. e. an offering not required by any law, 
but which a person might be prompted 
spontaneously to present as the expres- 
sion of a grateful heart. 

18. Neither shall it be imputed to him 
that offereth it. Heb. ^IDn"^ yehdshebj 
Gr. ov \oyigOr](T£Tai avTOi, it shall 7iot be 
placed to his account. He shall not be 
accounted as having made any offering 
at all. The sense of the term may be 
more fully learned by its use in a pas- 
sage of opposite import. Num. 18.27,30, 
' And this your heave-offering shall be 
reckoned (iQIL^n^ nehshab) unto you, as 
though it were the corn of the thresh- 
ing-floor, and as the fulness of the wine- 
press. Therefore thou shalt say unto 
them. When ye have heaved the best 
thereof from it, then it shall be counted 
(D12Jni3 nehshab) unto the Levites as the 
increase of the threshing-floor, and as 

the increase of the wine-press.' 

IT It shall he an abomination. Heb. 
5l!lD piggulj a polluted, foul, fetid 
thing. The word is peculiar, and of 
rare occurrence. It is met with only 
here and Lev. 19. 7, Is. 65. 4, and Ezek. 
4. 14; in all which cases the leading 
idea is plainly that of something ex- 
ceedingly loathsome and offensive, par- 
ticularly to the smell. Probably our 
English word carrion comes the nearest 
to a true definition. The Gr. here has 
jxiacxna miasma, though it elsewhere ren- 
ders it by unsacrijiceable and profane. 
In the version of Aquila, one of the 
exactest of translators, the original in 
Lev. 19. 7, is rendered anopXr.rov, that 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VII. 



71 



lion, and the soul that eateth of it 
shall bear his iniquity. 

19 And the flesh that toucheth 
any unclean thing shall not be eat- 
en ; it shall be burnt with fire : 
and as for the flesh, all that be 
clean shall eat thereof. 

20 But the soul that eateth of the 
flesh of the sacrifice of peace-offer- 
ings that pertain unto the Lord, 
r having his uncleanness upon him, 
even that soul ^ shall be cut off 
from his people. 

21 Moreover, the soul that shall 
touch any unclean things as t the 
uncleanness of man, or any ^ un- 
clean beast, or any w abominable 
unclean thino^^ and eat of the flesh 
of the sacrifice of peace-offerings 
which pertain unto the Lord, even 
that soul X shall be cut off from his 
people. 

22 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

r ch. 15. 3. s Gen. 17. 14. ^ ch. 12. and 13. 
and 15. u ch. 11. 24, 28. ^^ Ezek. 4. 14. 
X ver. 20. 

which is to be rejected, and accordantly 
with this the apostle, 1 Tim, 4. 14, 
speaking of certain meats which were 
not to be rejected, makes use of precise- 

ly the same term. ^ Shall bear his 

iniquity. That is, the punishment of 
his iniquity. This law is repeated, and 
the sanction enforced, with fearful em- 
phasis, in Lev. 19. 5-8: < And if ye 
offer a sacrifice of peace-offerings unto 
the Lord, ye shall offer it at your own 
will. It shall be eaten the same day 
ye offer it, and on the morrow : and if 
aught remain until the third day, it 
shall be burnt in the fire. And if it be 
eaten at all on the third day, it is abomi- 
nable ; it shall not be accepted. There- 
fore every one that eateth it shall bear 
his iniquity, because he hath profaned 
the hallowed thing of the Lord ; and 
that soul shall be cut off from among 
his people.' 

19. And the flesh that toucheth. Chal. 



I 23 Speak unto the children of 
j Israel, saying, y ye shall eat no 

manner of fat, of ox, or of sheep, 

or of goat. 

24 And the fat of the z beast that 
dieth of itself, and the fat of that 
which is torn with beasts, may be 
used in any other use : but ye shall 
in no wise eat of it. 

25 For whosoever eateth the fat 
of the beast, of which men offer 
an offering made by fire unto the 
Lord, even the soul that eateth it 
shall be cut off from his people. 

26 a Moreover, ye shall eat no 
manner of blood, whether it be of 
fowl or of beast, in any of your 
dwellings. 

27 Whatsoever soul it he that 
eateth any manner of blood, even 
that soul shall be cut off from his 
people. 

28 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

y ch. 3. 17. 2 ch. 17. 15. Deut. 14. 21. 
Ezek. 4. 14, and 44. 31. a Gen. 9. 4. ch. 3. 
17, and 17. 10-14. 

' The holy flesh ;' so called from its 
being consecrated to holy purposes. 
This polluting contact might happen 
while the flesh of the peace-offerings 
was being carried from the altar to the 

place where it was eaten. IT As for 

the flesh. That is, all the flesh that 
was not defiled by touching any unclean 
thing. 

20. Even that soul shall be cut off 
from his people. See this phrase ex- 
plained in the Note on Gen. 17. 14, 
Chal. ' That man shall be destroyed.' 
Gr. aTToAetratj shall perish. 

Prohibition of Fat and Blood. 
23-27. No manner of fat. of ox, or 
of sheep, ^c. This explains and limits 
the- precept contained Lev. 3. 17, re- 
stricting it to the fat of the three kinds 
of animals offered in sacrifice. We 
may perhaps recognize some physical 
as well as moral reasons for this pro- 



72 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



29 Speak unto the children of 
Israel, saying, ^He that offereth 
the sacrifice of his peace-offerings 
unto the Lord, shall bring his ob- 
lation unto the Lord of the sacri- 
fice of his peace-offerings. 

30 cHis own hands shall bring 
the offerings of the Lord made by 
fire; the fat with the breast, it 
shall he bring, that ^ the breast 
may be waved /or a wave- offering 
before the Lord. 

31 e And the priest shall burn the 
fat upon the altar : f but the breast 
shall be Aaron's and his sons'. 

l^ch.3. 1. cch.3. 3, 4, 9, 14. 'i Exod. 29. 
24, 27. ch. 8. 27, and 9. 21. Numb. 6. 20. 
ech. 3.5, 11, 16. fver. 34. 

hibition. * Medically considered, fat is 
certainly unwholesome, and particularly 
so in warm climates. Besides this, the 
eating of the fat pieces in question, and 
the use of fat in the preparation of food, 
is highly injurious to persons particu- 
larly subject to cutaneous disorders, as 
the Israelites seem to have been. To 
this we may add, that, as it was an 
object of many laws to discourage any 
friendly intercourse between the Israel- 
ites and the idolatrous nations, nothing 
could be better calculated than the pre- 
sent and other dietetic regulations, to 
prevent them from joining in the festiv- 
ities and social entertainments of their 
neighbors.' — Picf. Bib. The prohibi- 
tion of blood is more general, because 
the fat was offered to God only by way 
of acknowledgment ; but the blood 
made atonement for the soul, and so 
typified the sacrifice of Christ much 
more clearly than the burning of fat ; 
to this, therefore, a greater reverence 
must be paid, till those types had their 
accomplishment in the offering up of 
the body of Christ once for all. The 
Jews rightly expound this law as<for- 
bidding only the blood of the life, as 
they express it, not that which we call 
the gravy, for of that they supposed it 
was lawful to eat. 



32 And g the rigln shoulder shall 
ye give unto the priest/or a heave- 
offering of the sacrifices of your 
peace-offerings. 

33 He among the sons of Aaron 
that offereth the blood of the 
peace-offerings, and the fat, shall 
have the right shoulder for his part. 

34 For h the wave-breast and the 
heave-shoulder have I taken of the 
children of Israel from off the sac- 
rifices of their peace-offerings, and 
have given them unto Aaron the 
priest, and unto his sons, by a stat- 
ute for ever, from among the child- 
ren of Israel. 

g: ver. 34. ch. 9. 21. Numb. 6. 20. ^ Exod. 
29. 28. ch. 10. 14, 15. Numb. 18. 18. 19. 
Deut. 18. 3. 



Rules regulating the Priests' portion 
in the Peace-offerings. 

29. He that offereth, ^c. The drift 
of this verse is not very obvious. 
Patrick suggests that it is designed to 
convey the intimation that before the 
offerer and his friends feasted together, 
V. 15-18, he was to take care out of the 
sacrifice of his peace-offerings, ' to bring 
his oblation unto the Lord ;' i. e. to see 
that God had first his part of the peace- 
offering, for until that was done, no one 
could lawfully have any thing to do with 
the remainder. This interpretation we 
have, on the whole, little hesitation in 
adopting. 

30. His own hands shall bring, <^c. 
That is, it was an act which the offerer 
himself was to perform j and yet we 
learn elsewhere that this was not to be 
independently of the agency of the 
priest. For the sacrifice being slain 
and duly divided, the priest was to put 
what belonged to the Lord, viz. the fat 
with the breast and the shoulder, into 
the offerer's own hands, that he might 
present it himself to the Divine Ma- 
jesty. This vras to be done with a 
waving motion upward, in token of his 
devoutly proffering and delivering it 
over to God as Lord of heaven and carti- 



I 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VIL 



73 



! 35 H This is the portion of the 
j anointing of Aaron, and of the 
i anointing of his sons, out of the 
offerings^ of the Lokd made by fire, 
in the day lohen he presented them 
to minister unto the Lord in the 
priest's office ; 

36 Which the Lord commanded 
to be given them of the children 
of Israel, i in the day that he anoint- 
ed them, by a statute for ever 
throughout their generations. 

i ch. 8. 12, 30. Exod. 40. 13, 15. k ch. 6. 9. 

The act implied also an acknowledg- 
ment that every good thing came down 
from God, and an intimation that all the 
ways of his people should ^en(i upward^ 
so that their conversation should be in 
heaven. 

35. This is the portion of the anoint- 
ing, 8fC. Heb. tT{'>]^)2 t\^1 zoth mish- 
hath, this is the anointing of Aaron, &c. 
That is, this wave-breast and heave- 
shoulder are the portion or privilege 
arising from their being anointed and 
consecrated to the priesthood. That 
the allusion is to the ^ portion,' is evi- 
dent from the preceding and succeeding 
context ; and in t. 36, it is said, •' which 
the Lord commanded to be given them,' 
&c. As for ' anointing ' being used for 

* anointed ones,' it is a phraseology 
similar to that by which ' dreams ' is 
put for ' dreamers,' Jer. 27. 9, ' spirits ' 
for ' spiritual gifts,' 1 Cor. 14. 12, 

* thanksgivings ' for ' companies of 
thanksgivers,' Num. 12. 31, ' circum- 
cision ' for ' persons circumcised,' Rom. 
2. 26, ' divination ' for the ' rewards of 
divination,' Num. 22. 7, ' iniquity' for 
the ' punishment or desert of iniquity,' 
Lev. 7. 18, Job 11.6, and so in numer- 
ous other instances. 



CHAPTER VIII, 

The Consecration of Aaron and his 
sons to the Priesthood. 
The sacred writer here passes from 
sacred things to sacred persons. The 
7 



37 This is the law k of the burnt- 
offering, 1 of the meat-offering, m and 
of the sin-offering, nand of the tres- 
pass-offering, oand of the conse- 
crations, and p of the sacrifice of the 
peace-offerings ; 

38 Which the Lord commanded 
Moses in mount Sinai, in the day 
that he commanded the children 
of Israel qto offer their oblations 
unto the Lord, in the wilderness 
of Sinai. 

1 ch. 6. 14. m ch. 6. 25. n ver. 1. o ch. 
6.20. Exod. 29. 1. P ver. 11. q ch. 1. 2. 

present chapter describes the ceremonies 
previously ordained which marked the 
induction of Aaron and his sons into 
the priestly ofiice. Most of the rites, 
however, peculiar to this occasion, are 
the same with those commanded Ex. 29. 
and which are there explained at length. 
Consequently but brief comments will 
be requisite in this connexion. It may 
suffice simply to remark, that the priest- 
hood was originally appointed to remain 
in Aaron's family through all succeed- 
ing generations, and no one who was 
not of that lineage might on any ac- 
count intrude into the sacred office. 
Aaron was succeeded by Eleazar, his 
eldest surviving son, after the death of 
Nadab and Abihu, and it continued in 
his family through seven generations, 
till the time of Eli. On his death it 
was removed from that branch for the 
wickedness of Eli's sons, and given to 
the descendants of Ithamar, Aaron's 
other son. In the time of Solomon it 
returned again into the line of Eleazar, 
in which it continued till the Babylonish 
captivit)^ Jeshua, the first high priest 
after the return of the Jews, was of the 
same family 5 but after his time the 
appointment became very uncertain and 
irregular ; and after Judea became a 
Roman province, no regard whatever 
was paid to this part of the original 
divine institution. The office was in 
fact in process of time so far desecrated 
in the general corruption, that it was 



74 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



CHAPTER VIIT. 
4 ND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
•^^ ses, saying, 

2 a Take Aaron and his sons with 
him, and b the garments, and c the 
anointing oil, and a bullock for the 
sin-offering, and two rams, and a 
basket of unleavened bread; 

3 And gather thou all the con- 
gregation together unto the door of 
the tabernacle of the congregation. 



aExod. 29. 1, 2, 
c Exod. 30. 24, 25. 



b Exod. 28. 2, 4. 



often sold to the highest bidder, whetlier 
of the family or not ; and so things con- 
tinued, till finally the nation had filled 
up the measure of its iniquities, and 
priest, altar, and temple were all swept 
away in the abolition of the Jewish 
economy and the dispersion of the race. 

2. Take Aaron and his sons with him, 
and the garments. That is, the holy 
priestly garments which God had be- 
fore commanded to be made, and which 
were now ready. 

3. Gather thou all the congregation. 
That is, the elders and principal men 
of the congregation, who represented 
the body of the people, as the court 
would hold but few of the many thou- 
sands of Israel. This is confirmed by 
Lev. 9. 1, where Moses is said to have 
called the elders together instead of the 
whole congregation, as here. 

4. The assembly was gathered together. 
Heb. rn^ edah ; the same word with 
that rendered ' congregation ' in v. 2, 
and which ought here also, for uniform- 
ity's sake, to have been rendered in the 
same way. The nature and objects of 
the Levitical priesthood were such as 
to make a large attendance of the heads 
of the people proper in itself, and they 
would moreover serve as witnesses that 
Aaron and his sons were not intruders 
into the sacred office, but solemnly and 
specially inducted into it, according to 
the express appointment of Jehovah 
himself. 



4 And Moses did as the Lord 
commanded him ; and the assem- 
bly was gathered together unto 
the door of the tabernacle of the 
congregation. 

5 And Moses said unto the con- 
gregation, d This is the thing which 
the Lord commanded to be done. 

6 And Moses brought Aaron and 
his sons, eand washed them with 
water. 

d Exod. 29. 4. c Exod. 29. 4. 

5. This is the thing which the Lord 
commanded to he done. q. d. I am now 
about to enter upon that work which 
the Lord commanded when I was with 
him in the holy mount, Ex. 29. 4. And 
so throughout the remainder of the 
present chapter, whatever portions of 
it are left unexplained, they will be 
found illustrated in the corresponding 
chapter in Exodus. 

6. Washed them with water. That is, 
caused them to wash themselves. See 
upon this ceremony of ablution the Note 
on Ex. 29. 4. We may give, however, 
in this connexion the following note 
from the Pictorial Bible. ' Here the 
ceremonies of consecration commence 
with ablutions, and we have seen that 
the priests were required to bathe their 
hands and feet whenever they entered 
the tabernacle. This, doubtless, was 
not merely to ensure physical cleanness, 
but also to symbolize that spiritual 
purity with which man should appear 
before God. The present washing, 
however, is distinguished from the daily 
ablution ; inasmuch as the whole per- 
son seems now to have been washed, 
but only the hands and feet on common 
occasions. The idea of the fitness of 
such a practice is so obvious, that it 
has been more or less in use in most 
religious systems. We find at the 
heathen temples, lavers of a similar 
use to this at the tabernacle. The 
Egyptian priests washed themselves 
with cold water twice every day, and 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VIIL 



75 



twice at night ; the Greeks had their 
sprinklings, the Romans their lustra- 
tions and lavations ; the ancient Chris- 
tians practised ablution before receiving 
the sacrament, and also bathed their 
eyes on entering a church. The Roman 
CathoJic church retains something of 
the practice of ablution before, and 
sometimes after mass j and Calmet 
says that the holy-water vessels at the 
entrance of their churches are in imita- 
tion of the laver of the tabernacle. The 
oriental Christians have also their 
solemn washings on particular occa- 
sions, such as Good Friday. The prac- 
tice af ablution was adopted by Mahom- 
med in a very full sense ; for his foUov/- 
ers are not only obliged to perform 
their ablutions before they enter a 
mosque, but before they commence the 
prayers, wherever ofiered, which they 
are required to repeat five times each 
day. This is certainly the most bur- 
densome system of ablution v;hich ever 
existed in ancient or modern times. 
The Hindoos also rejoice in the purify- 
ing virtues of their idolized Ganges, and 
wash also in other waters, because they 
believe that such will be equally efiect- 
ual, if, whilst they bathe, they say, ' O 
Ganges, purify me !' In fact, nothing 
is or has been more common than ablu- 
tions in the w^orship which different 
nations render to their gods j and there 
are few acts connected with their ser- 
vice which are not begun or ended with 
some rite symbolical of purification. 
In the religion of classical antiquity, 
the priest was obliged to prepare him- 
self by ablution for offering sacrifice ; 
for which purpose there was usually 
water at the entrance of the temple. In 
very ancient times the priests seem to 
have previously bathed themselves in 
some river or stream. But such ablu- 
tions were only necessary in sacrifices 
to the celestial gods, sprinkling being 
sufficient for the terrestrial and infernal 
deities. (See Banier's ^ Mythology of 
the Ancients,' vol. 1. p. 271.) — We may 
here observe, that, from the obligation 



of the priests to wash their feet before 
entering the tabernacle, and for other 
reasons, it has been inferred that they 
officiated with bare feet. It is also ob- 
served, that in the enumeration of the 
articles of the priestly dress, sandals 
are not mentioned, neither does Jose- 
phus in his account speak of them. It 
is true that Plutarch represents the 
Hebrew priest as officiating with bus- 
kins ; but his authority is of the least 
possible weight on such a subject. We 
believe ourselves that the priests did 
officiate barefoot, although our convic- 
tion does not proceed from the reasons 
thus stated ; but rather from the knowl- 
edge that it was in very ancient times, 
as at present, a common mark of respect 
in the East to uncover the feet. (See 
Note on Exod. 3. 5.) Even classical 
heathenism affords instances of this 
usage. ^ Adore and sacrifice with naked 
feet,^ was a maxim of Pythagoras, 
which he probably brought, v/ith the 
rest of his philosophy, from the East. 
The temple of Diana at Crete might not 
be entered with covered feet ; the Ro- 
man ladies were obliged to be barefoot 
in the tem.ple of Vesta ; and the suppli- 
ants went barefoot to the temple of 
Jupiter when they prayed for rain. The 
Mohammedans, and the Asiatic and 
Abyssinian Christians, invariably take 
off their shoes before they enter a place 
of worship, as do the Brahmins of India 
w^hen they enter their temples. As to 
the Jews themselves, it is impossible to 
say, unless by inference, what they did 
in the tabernacle ; but it seems fair to 
conclude that they did the same as after- 
wards in the Temple, and that they 
there officiated barefoot we have the 
concurrent testimony of various writers. 
Maimonides says that none were allow- 
ed to enter the Temple v/ith shoes, or 
v\'ith unclean feet, or with a staff, or in 
the dress in which they worked at their 
respective callings. The Talmud is 
positive on the same subject, saying 
that no priest or layman might enter 
with shoes j but as this regulation, in 



76 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490- 



7 ^And he put upon him the 
gcoat, and girded him with the 
girdle, and clothed him with the 
robe, and put the ephod upon him, 
and he girded him with the curious 
girdle of the ephod, and bound it 
unto him therewith. 

8 And he put the breast-plate 
"upon him: also he i^put in the 
breast-plate the Urim and the 
Thummim. 

9 i And he put the mitre upon his 
head; also upon the mitre, even 
"upon his fore-front, did he put the 

f Exod. 29. 5. g Exod. 28. 4. h Exod. 
28. 30. i Exod. 29. 6. 

conjunction with their way of life and 
the thinness of their official dress, was 
injurious to their health, there was a 
small apartment or closet, called the 
* stove ' or 'fire-room,' which had a 
heated floor, on which the priests might 
occasionally warm their feet. (See 
Saurin's ' Dissertations,' 44. and 45. j 
Calmet's ' Commentaire Litteral,' on 
Exod. 3. 5, and 30. 18, &c.)' 

7. And he put upon him the coat, Sj-c. 
It would seem that Moses on this occa- 
sion, by an extraordinary commission 
from God, executed himself the ofiice 
of High-Priest on this and the six fol- 
lowing days, 

8. He put in the breast-plate the Urim 
and Thummim. See Note on Ex. 28. 30. 

10. Anointed the tabernacle. Prob- 
ably by putting his finger in the oil 
and then smearing it over the tabernacle 
and its utensils. 

11. Anointed the altar and all his ves- 
sels, to sanctify them. The altar by 
these rites was sanctified, so that 
thenceforward through the sacrifices 
daily offered upon it, atonement might 
be made for the sins of the people, 
whereas afterwards the altar was to be 
considered as sanctifying the gifts and 
oblations laid upon it, according to 
Mat. 23. 19, ' Ye fools and blind ; for 
whether is greater, the gift, or the altar 
that sanctifieth the gift.^ 



golden plate, the holy crown ; as 
the Lord k commanded Moses. 

10 i And Moses took the anointing 
oil, and anointed the tabernacle 
and all that ivas therein, and sanc- 
tified them. 

11 And he sprinkled thereof upon 
the altar seven times, and anointed 
the altar and all his vessels, both 
the laver and his foot, to sanctify 
them. 

12 And he ^ poured of the anoint- 
ing oil upon Aaron's head, and 
anointed him, to sanctify him. 

k Exod. 28. 37, &c. 1 Exod. 30. 26, 27, 28, 
29. m ch. 21. 10, 12. Exod. 29. 7, and 30. 30, 
Ps. 133. 2. 



12. Poured of the anointing oil upon 
Aaron'' s head, and anointed him, to sanc- 
tify him. That is, to set him apart to 
his ofiice. ' From comparing this \'erse 
with V. 30, it is thought that Aaron 
alone was anointed on the head, his 
sons being merely sprinkled ; or, as we 
should understand, that Aaron was 
sprinkled in common with his sons, but 
that the anointing or pouring out of oil 
upon his head was an addition peculiar 
to him. The custom of setting persons 
apart for particularly dignified or holy 
offices, by anointing, seems to have 
originated in the East, and in most 
cases appears to have symbolized the 
effusion of the gifts and graces which 
they were presumed to receive from 
heaven to qualify them for distinguished 
offices. Hence this sacred anointing 
seems to have been considered as invest- 
ing with a peculiar sanctity the person 
on whom it had been conferred. We 
see this in the reverence with which 
'the Lord's anointed' is on all occa- 
sions mentioned in Scripture. The per- 
sons set apart to their offices by anoint- 
ing, among the Hebrews, were the 
priests, kings, and prophets ; but there 
is some doubt about the latter, to which 
we shall have occasion to advert, as 
well as to the unction of the kings. 
The precious oil seems to have been 
more profusely expended on Aaron than 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER VIII. 



77 



13 II And Moses brouglit Aaron's 
sons, and put coats upon them, and 
girded them with girdles, and put 
bonnets upon them; as the Lord 
commanded Moses. 

14 o And he brought the bullock 
for the sin-ofFering : and Aaron and 
his sons plaid their hands upon the 
head of the bullock for the sin- 
oiferiag. 

15 And he slew it ; qand Moses 
took the blood, and put it upon the 
horns of the altar round about with 
his finger, and purified the altar, 
and poured the blood at the bottom 
of the altar, and sanctified it, to 
make reconciliation upon it. 

16 rAad he took all the fat that 
was upon the inwards, and the caul 
above the liver, and the two kid- 
neys, and their fat, and Moses 
burned it upon the altar. 

17 But the bullock, and his hide, 
his flesh, and his dung, he burnt 
with fire without the camp; as 
the Lord s commanded Moses. 

18 IT *And he brought the ram 
for the burnt -offering : and Aaron 
and his sons laid their hands upon 
the head of the ram. 

19 And he killed it ; and Moses 
sprinkled the blood upon the altar 
round about. 

20 And he cut the ram into 

n Exod. 29. S. 9. Exod. 29. 10. Ezek. 
43. 19. P ch. 4. 4. q Exod. 29. 12, 36. ch. 
4. 7. Ezek. 43. 20, 26. Heb. 9. 22. r Exod. 
29. 13. ch. 4. 8. s ch. 4. 11, 12. Exod. 29. 
14. t Exod. 29. 15. 

ill any other application. V\'e learn 
from Ps. 132. 2, that being poured on 
his head, it ran down on his beard and 
to the collar of his coat (the robe of the 
ephod) — not to the skirts of his gar- 
ments, as there translated. The Jew- 
ish writers have many fancies about the 
mode in which the oil was applied, into 
which we need not enter. If the high- 
priest was, as some state, fully robed 
before anointed, the mitre might have 
been taken off for that ceremony : but 
7* 



pieces; and Moses burat the head, 
and the pieces, and the fat. 

21 And he washed the inwards 
and the legs in water ; and Moses 
burnt the whole ram upon the 
altar: it icas a burnt-sacrifice for a 
sweet savour, a7id an offering made 
by fire unto the Lord; uas the 
Lord commanded Moses. 

22 H And whe brought the other 
ram, the ram of consecration : and 
Aaron and his sons laid their hands 
upon the head of the ram. 

23 And he slew it ; and Moses 
took of the blood of it, and put it 
upon the tip of Aaron's right ear, 
and upon the thumb of his right 
hand, and upon the great toe of his 
right foot. 

24 And he brought Aaron's son's, 
and Moses put of the blood upon 
the tip of their right ear, and upon 
the thumbs of their right hands, 
and upon the great toes of their 
right feet : and Moses sprinkled 
the blood upon the altar round 
about. 

25 xAnd he took the fat, and the 
rump, and all the fat that icas upon 
the inwards, and the caul above the 
liver, and the two kidneys, and 
their fat, and the right shoulder: 

26 y And out of the basket of un- 
leavened bread, that was before 
the Lord, he took one unleavened 
cake, and a cake of oiled bread, and 

u Exod. 29. 18. ^ Exod. 29. 19. 31. x Exod. 
29. 22. y Exod. 29. 23. 

others think that the tiara was not put 
on till after the anointing.' — Fid. Bib. 
15. And he slew it ; and Moses took, 
S,'C. Heb. nll'?2 Hp*"" toriw'^'l va-yis^hat 
va-yikka'h mosheh. It would not per- 
haps be easy to show that there is 
any thing contrary to the grammatical 
construction in rendering this passage, 
^ And Moses slew it, and took,' &c., but 
as the versions are all in favor of the 
present rendering, we prefer to abide 
by it. 



78 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



one wafer, and put them on the fat, 
and upon the right shoulder: 

27 And he put all z upon Aaron's 
hands, and upon his sons' hands, 
and waved them /or a wave-offer- 
ing before the Lord. 

28 a And Moses took them from 
off their hands, and burnt them on 
the altar upon the burnt-offering: 
they loere consecrations for a sweet 
savour : it is an offering made by 
fire unto the Lord. 

29 And Moses took the breast, 
and waved it for a wave-offering 
before the Lord : for of the ram 
of consecration it was Moses' 
^ part ; as the Lord commanded 
Moses. 

i 30 And c Moses took of the 
anointing oil, and of the blood 
which was upon the altar, and 
sprinkled it upon Aaron, and upon 
his garments, and upon his sons, 
and upon his sons' garments with 
him ; and sanctified Aaron, and 
his garments, and his sons, and his 
sons' garments with him. 
31 ^ And Moses said unto Aaron 

z Exod. 29. 24, &c. a Exod. 29. 25. b Exod. 
29. 26. c Exod. 29. 21, and 30. 30. Numb. 
3. 3. d Exod. 29. 31, 32. 

33. Ye shall not go out of the door of 
the tabernacle in seven days. That is, 
out of the court of the tabernacle, with 
which door of the tabernacle is often 
synonimous. The Heb. has nt1&)2 
7nippcthah, which might as well be ren- 
dered ' from the door,' as ' out of the 
door,' for the consecration was not per- 
formed within, but at the door of the 
tabernacle. The Gr. has very properly 

OTTO dvpag, from the door. IT For 

seven days shall he consecrate you. 
That is, Moses shall consecrate you ; 
for the command of God is here referred 
to, and cited according to the sense, 
Ex. 29. 35. So V. 34, « as he (Moses) 
hath done.' The number seven among 
the Hebrews was the number of ^e?-- 
fection, and the seven days of conse- 



and to his sons, <iBoil the flesh at 
the door of the tabernacle of the 
congregation; and there eat it 
with the bread that is in the basket 
of consecrations, as I commanded, 
saying, Aaron and his sons shall 
eat it. 

32 eAnd that which remaineth 
of the flesh and of the bread shall 
ye burn with fire. 

33 And ye shall not go out of the 
door of the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation in seven days, until the 
days of your consecration be at an 
end : for f seven days shall he con- 
secrate you. 

34 g As he hath done this day, so 
the Lord hath commanded to do, 
to make an atonement for you. 

35 Therefore shall ye abide at 
the door of the tabernacle of the 
congregation day and night seven 
days, and hkeep the charge of the 
Lord, that ye die not : for so I am 
commanded. 

36 So Aaron and his sons did all 
things which the Lord command- 
ed by the hand of Moses. 

e Exod. 29. 34. f Exod. 29. 30, 35. Ezek. 
43. 25, 26. g Heb. 7. 16. h Num. 3. 7, and 
9. 19. Deut. 11. 1. 1 Kings 2 3. 

cration implied a full and perfect con- 
secration to the sacerdotal office, and 
correctly intimated, moreover, that 
their whole lives were to be devoted to 
this solemn service. 

34. As he hath done this day. That 
is, as hath been done j another instance 
of that indefinite phraseology of which 
we have before so frequently spoken. 
See Note on Lev. 1. 5. Thus also 2 
Sam. 15. 31, ^ And one told David,' i. e. 
it was told him. Mark 10. 3, ^And 
they brought,' compared with Mat. 19. 
*13, ' Then were brought.' 



CHAPTER IX. 

Aaron^s entrance on the Priestly Office. 

1. It came to pass on the eighth day. 

Not upon the eighth day of the month, 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IX. 



79 



CHAPTER IX. 

AISD ait came lo pass on the 
eighth day, that Moses called 
Aaron and his sons, and the elders 
of Israel ; 

2 And he said unto Aaron, ^ Take 
thee a young calf for a sin-offering, 
cand a ram for a burnt-offering, 
without blemish, and offer ihem 
before the Lord. 

3 And unto the children of Israel 
thou shalt speak, saying, ^ Take ye 
a kid of the goats for a sin-offer- 
ing ; and a calf and a lamb, both 
of !he first year, without blemish, 
for a burnt-offering ; 

4 Also a bullock and a ram for 

a Ezek. 43. 27. ^ ch. 4. 3, and 8. 14. Exod. 
59. 1. c ch. 8. 13. d ch. 4. 23. Ezra 6. 17, 
and 10. 19. 

but on the first day after their conse- 
cration, which occupied seven days, 
and before which they were deemed 
unfit to minister in holy things, being 
considered in a state of imperfection. 
All creatures, for the most part, were 
considered as in a state of uncleanness 
and imperfection seven days, and per- 
fected on the eighth. So here the 
priests were not admitted until the 
eighth day to minister in their office. 

-IF And the elders of Israel. Gr. 

rnv yepovaiav lapanX, the eldership or 
senate of Israel. These, together with 
a large body of the people, were assem- 
bled in the court, v. 23, 24, where it 
was the duty of the elders to impose 
their hands upon the sin-offering of the 
congregation. 

2. Take thee a young calf for a sin- 
offering. Heb. 'np^ "^ ben hdkdr^ son 
of the herd. This offering is supposed 
by the Jewish writers to have been 
appointed for Aaron m person, in refer- 
ence to his sin in the matter of the 
golden calf. But it may be sufficient to 
hold that this offering respected merely 
the general frailties and imperfections 
of Aaron, as one of a fallen race, who, 
though an high-priest by office, yet stood 



peace-offerings, to sacrifice before 
the Lord; and ea meat-offering 
mingled with oil: for f to-day the 
Lord will appear unto you. 

5 H And they brought that which 
Moses commanded before the tab- 
ernacle of the congregation: and 
all the congregation drew near and 
stood before the Lord. 

6 And Moses said, This is the 
thing which the Lord commanded 
that ye should do : and g the glory 
of the Lord shall appear unto you. 

7 And Moses said unto Aaron, 
Go UQto the altar, and h offer thy 
sin-offering, and thy burnt- offering, 
and make an atonement for thyself, 

e ch. 2. 4. f ver. 6. 23. Exod. 29. 43. 
S ver. 23. Exod. 24. 16. h ch. 4. 3. 1 Sam. 
3. 14. Heb. 5. 3, and 7. 27, and 9. 7. 



in as much need of an atonement as any 
of the people whom he represented. 

4. To-day the Lord shall appear unto 
you. That is, the visible glory of the 
Lord v/ill appear in the increased effial- 
gence of the cloudy pillar resting over 
the tabernacle, and also in sending forth 
from the midst of the cloud a fire to 
consume the offerings upon the altar. 
Chal. ^ The glory of the Lord shall be 
revealed.' Comp. v. 6. By reason of 
this expected appearance, the people 
were to prepare and sanctify themselves 
by every kind of sacrifice, in allusion to 
which it is said of a still more glorious 
appearance, of which this was a shadow, 
1 John 2. 3, 'We know that when he 
shall appear we shall be like him, for 
we shall see him as he is. And every 
m.an that hath this hope in him purifieth 
himself as he is pure.' 

5. All the congregation drew near and 
stood before the Lord. That is, before 
the sanctuary, in the court ; before the 
dwelling-place of the Lord's glory. 

7. Go unto the altar and offer ^ S,'C. 
These further prescribed offerings, so 
immediately succeeding those v/hich 
had been offered at the consecration, 
show very forcibly the consciousness 



80 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



and for llie people : and i ofTer the 
olfering of the people, and make an 
atonement for them; as the Lord 
commanded. 

8 ^ Aaron therefore went unto 
the altar, and slew the calf of the 
sin-offering, which was for himself. 

9 i^ And the sons of Aaron brought 
the blood unto him : and he dipped 
his finger in the blood, and iput it 
upon the horns of the altar, and 
poured out the blood at the bottom 
of the altar: 

10 ^ But the fat, and the kidneys, 
and the caul above the liver of the 
sin-offering, he burnt upon the 
altar; "as the Lord commanded 
Moses. 

11 o And the flesh and the hide he 

1 ch. 4. 16, 20. Heb. 5. 1. k ch. 8. 15. 
ISeech. 4. 7. ^ch. 8. 16. n ch. 4. 8. 



which even the holiest and most ac- 
cepted persons ought to entertain of 
their own sinfulness. Those who are 
holy by office are still to know and con- 
fess that they are sinners by nature, 
even as others. 

8. Aaron therefore went unto the 
altar. These being the first offerings 
that were ever offered by the Levitical 
priesthood, according to the newdy 
enacted lav/ of sacrifices, the manner of 
offering them is particularly related, 
that it might appear how exactly they 
agreed with the institution. Aaron was 
fhst required to make expiation for 
himself, that he might thereby be 

qualified to do it for the people. 

IT And slew the calf. This often im- 
plies no more than ordered, procured, 
or superintended the slaying. See Note 
on Lev. 1. 5. But in the present in- 
stance it is not unreasonable to suppose 
that Aaron performed the slaughter in 
person. 

9. The sons of Aaron brought the 
blood unto him. Having caught the 
blood in basins, as it run from the vic- 
tim v.dien killed, they brought it to him 
as he stood waiting at the altar. The 



burnt with fire without the camp. 

12 And he slew the burnt-offer- 
ing; and Aaron's sons presented 
unto him the blood, p which he 
sprinkled round about upon the 
altar. 

13 qAnd they presented the 
burnt-offering unto him, with the 
pieces thereof, and the head : and 
he burnt them upon the altar. 

14 r And he did wash the inwards 
and the legs, and burnt ihe7n upon 
the burnt-offering on the altar. 

15 % s And he brought the people's 
offering, and took the goat which 
was the sin-offering for the people, 
and slew it, and offered it for sin, 
as the first. 

o ch. 4. 11, and 8. 17. P ch. 1. 5, and 
8. 19. q ch. 8. 20. r ch. 8. 21. s yer. 3. 
Isa. 53. 10. Heb. 2. 17, and 5. 3. 



ceremonies that followed have been 
already described. 

10. He burnt ujoon the altar. He laid 
them in order upon the altar, that they 
might be consumed, not with ordinary 
fire, but with that which was ere long 
to come forth from before the Lord ; for 
common fire, it would seem, was no 
longer to be used when Aaron's sacri- 
fice began, as it had been all along be- 
fore. Still it is possible that the mira- 
culous fire did not issue forth till the 
holocaust of the people came to bo 
be offered, v. 24. 

15. He brought the people^s offering. 
Having duly presented the requisite 
ofiering for himself, he was now pre- 
pared to ofiiciate in behalf of the people, 
which he did according to the mode 
prescribed, Ex. 29. 39, 40. Lev. chs. 

1. 2. and 7., on which see Notes. 

IT Took the goat — a7id offered it for sin. 
Heb. inb^tOln^ yeUiatteehu. It is the 
same term with that which occurs Lev. 
8. 15, and which is both here and there M 
rendered by the Gr. KaOapiaeu, cleansed. ^ 
The Heb. word ^t^n 'hdtdy in its radical 
or Kal form, signifies to sin ; while in 
the Piel form it is used to signify purg- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER IX, 



81 



16 And he brought the burnt- 
offering, and offered it t according 
to the manner. 

17 And he brought ^the meat- 
offering, and took an handful there- 
of, and burnt it upon the altar, 
X beside the burnt-sacrifica of the 
morning. 

18 He slew also the bullock and 
the ram for ya sacrifice of peace- 
offerings, which was for the people : 
and Aaron's sons presented unto 
him the blood, which he sprinkled 
upon the altar round about, 

19 And the fat of the bullock, and 

t ch. 1. 3, 10. u ver. 4. ch. 2. 1, 2. x Ex. 
29. 38. y ch. 3. 1, &c. 

ing away sin ly sacrifice. (See Note 
on Lev. 6. 20.) Thus Gen. 31. 39/ That 
which was torn of beasts, I hare the 
loss of it (tljtOJj^ a'hattenahy I expiated, 
atoned, made satisfaction for it).' Ps. 
51. 7j ' Purge me (Xi^uTlTi te^hattemi) 
with hyssop, and I shall be clean.' 
Lev. 8. 15, ' And Moses purified (J^tin'^ 
ye'hatte) the altar and sanctified it.' 

16. According to the manner. Heb. 
uj^'bT^iD kammishpdt, according to the 
judgment or ordinance. See Note on 
Lev. 5. 10. Gr. cos KaOrjxei, as it was fit. 
The ordinance alluded to is found in the 
general law of the first chapter. 

17. Beside the hurnt sacrifice of the 
morning. That is, in addition to the 
daily sacrifice of the lamb, which was 
not to be superseded by the extra offer- 
ings of this or any other occasion. 

19. That which cover eth, 8fC. ' The 
fat that covereth the inwards ' is the fat 
thin membrane extended over the intes- 
tines, and attached to the concave part 
of the liver, called the omentum, or caul. 
And by ' the caul above the liver,' is 
commonly understood, after the Septua- 
gint, the great lobe of the liver {major 
lohus hepatis), which, althougli part of 
the liver itself, may very properly be 
rendered ' the lobe over ' or ^ by the 
liver.' As to the caul, it was a com- 
mon offering in the sacrifices of the 



of the ram, the rump, and that 
which covereth the ifiwards^ and 
the kidneys, and the caul above the 
Hver : 

20 And they put the fat upon the 
breasts, z and he burnt the fat upon 
the altar: 

21 And the breasts and the right 
shoulder Aaron waved ^for a 
wave-offering before the Lord; as 
Moses commanded. 

22 And Aaron lifted up his hand 
toward the people, band blessed 
them ; and came down from offer- 

z ch. 3. 5. 16. a Exod. 29. 24, 26. ch. 7. 
30, 31, 32, 33, 34. b Numb. 6. 23. Deut. 
21. 5. Luke 24. 50. 



ancient heathen ; and Strabo remarks, 
that the Persians, in their sacrifices, 
offered nothing else upon the altar. 
Calmet, vv^ho gives these instances in his 
' Commentaire Litteral,' cites Athenaeus 
in evidence that the ancients ate the 
liver covered with, or enfolded in, the 
caul ; and he thinks it probable that the 
liver of the victim was, in the same 
manner, wrapped up in the caul before 
it was laid upon the altar ; and that this 
is what Moses means by the ^ caul 
above ' or upon the liver. 

22. Aaron lifted up his hand toward 
the people, and blessed them. By im- 
ploring, and then pronouncing the 
divine blessing upon them. The so- 
lemnity of blessing the people in the 
name of the Lord appertained especially 
to the priestly office ; Deut. 10. 8, ^ The 
Lord separated the tribe of Levi to 
bear the ark of the covenant of the Lord, 
to stand before the Lord to minister 
unto him, and to bless in his name unto 
this day.' The form of the benediction 
is given Num. 6. 23, 27. Considered as 
a type, this vv^as accomplished by our 
great high-priest, Christ Jesus, when, 
having finished his ministry on earth, 
^ he lifted up his hands and blessed ' his 
disciples, at his ascension into heaven, 

Luke 24. 50. *)[ And came down. 

That is, from the bank or elevation 



82 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



ing of ihe sin-ofTering, and the | 
bumt-offering, and peace-offerings. 
23 And Moses and Aaron went 
mto the tabernacle of the congre- 
gation, and came out, and blessed 
the people: c and the glory of the 
Lord appeared unto all the people. 

c ver. 6. Numb. 14. 10, and 16. 19, 42. 

which formed the ascent to the altar, as 
steps were forbidden. 

23. Moses and Aaron went into the 
tabernacle. Aaron, the priest, went in 
according to the law, Ex. 30. 7, 9, to 
burn incense on the golden altar 5 Moses 
v/ent in with Aaron, in all likelihood to 
instruct him in the manner of the ser- 
vice that was to be performed there, 
such as burning the incense, lighting 
the lamps, setting in order the shew- 
bread, &c., that he might instruct his 
sons in it.— — IT The glory of the Lord 
appeared unto all the people. That is, 
the visible sign of God's glorious pre- 
sence, indicated either by the fire men- 
tioned in the next verse, or by the more 
luminous appearance of the cloudy pil- 
lar, as in Ex. 16. 10, and 40. 34, or by 
both. It was a token of God's gracious 
acceptance of them and of their ser- 
vices, as in 1 Kings 8. 10 — 12. The 
miraculous fire now sent forth from the 
divine presence, was, according to the 
Hebrews, kept alive upon the altar till 
the time of Solomon. Under the second 
temple, the Jews confess that the sacred 
fire was wanting. 

24. They shouted, 8fC. From the 
combined effect of wonder and joy ; de- 
voutly and ardently giving thanks to 
God for this mark of his special favor. 
Thus on a similar occasion, 2 Chron. 
27. 3, * When all the sons of Israel saw 
how the fire came down, and the glory 
of the Lord shone upon the house, they 
bowed themselves with their faces to 
the ground, upon the pavement, and 
worshipped and praised the Lord, saj^- 
ing, For he is good, for his mercy en- 
dureth for ever.' Had they not been 



24 And ti there came a fire out 
from before the Lord, and consum- 
ed upon the altar the burnt-offer- 
ing and the fat : which when all 
the people saw, e they shouted, 
and fell on their faces. 

d Gen. 4. 4. Judg. 6. 21. 1 Kings 18. 38. 
2 Chron. 7. 1. Ps. 20. 3. e 1 Kings IS. 39. 
2 Chron 7, 3. Ezra 3. 11. 

previously taught to expect some extra- 
ordinary expressions of the divine re- 
gard, they would probably have been 
terrified as Gideon and Manoah were ; 
but being prepared, they were filled 
wdth triumph and exultation, and rent 
the air with their shouts. 



CHAPTER X, 

We are called, in the present chapter, 
to pass by a melancholy transition from 
a scene of high festive, but holy, re- 
joicing, to a scene of awful judgment 
and heart-rending sorrow. The taber- 
nacle had been finished 5 Aaron and his 
four sons, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar 
and Ithamar, had been consecrated to 
the priesthood 5 the victims had been 
slain ] Moses and Aaron had solemnly 
blessed the congregation 3 the divine 
requirements had all been complied 
with ; and in attestation of God's ac- 
ceptance of their services, his glory had 
appeared to all the people, and the fire 
of heaven had descended upon the altar 
and kindled a flame never to be quench- 
ed. In the midst of these hallowed 
solemnities, when all the assembled 
host were bowing before the Lord, and 
giving vent to expressions of profound 
but chastened joy, an act of rash, pre- 
sumptuous, and sacrilegious daring on 
the part of Nadab and Abihu, in a mo- 
ment turns the scene of worship into 
one of woe, and spreads sackcloth over 
the tabernacle ! Scarcely had the celes- 
tial fire come down in mercy to consume 
the sacrifice, when again it descends in 
wrath to consume the sacrificers ! This 
tragical event is thus briefly but dis- 
tinctly recorded by Moses, whose 



I 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER X. 



83 



characteristic it is neither to extenuate 
nor set down aught in malice ; * And 
Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, 
took either of them his censer, and put 
fire therein, and put incense thereon, 
and offered strange fire before the Lord, 
which he commanded them not. And 
there went out fire from the Lord, and 
devoured them, and they died before 
the Lord.' The words are few, but of 
fearfully solemn import, and the whole 
narrative presents a large theme of 
salutary practical remark and admoni- 
tion. The principal reflections sug- 
gested by the mournful occurrence will 
be adduced in the course of our com- 
ments on the several verses -, but v/e 
may properly pause, at the outset, to 
consider somewhat particularly the 
nature, circumstances, and grounds of 
the offence which drew down such a 
terrible infliction of wrath upon the 
perpetrators. Whatever may be deter- 
mined as to the precise nature of the 
crime, it is clear that it was aggravated 
by the character of those by v/hom it 
was committed. These were the sons^ 
the two eldest sons, of Aaron the high 
priest. They were, from their relation 
to Aaron, men of name and note in Is- 
rael ; and they had formerly been hon- 
ored with the high distinction of 
accompanying Moses and their father 
to the summit of the hallowed mount, 
where they were favored wath a vision 
of God, such as had never before been 
accorded to mortal ej-es 5 Ex. 24. 9. 
' Then went up Moses and Aaron, Na- 
dab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders 
of Israel ; and they saw^ the God of 
Israel : and there was under his feet as 
it v.'ere a paved work of a sapphire-stone, 
and as it were the body of heaven in his 
clearness.' None of the seventy elders 
are named ; but Moses and Aaron, Na- 
dab and AbihU; from their pre-eminence 
in the congregation, are expressly 
designated. Again, they had just been 
consecrated, along with their father, to 
the dignity of the priestly ofiice. They 
had just been assisting him and Moses 



in the sacred offerings. They had been 
prominent actors in the solemnities of 
an occasion which should above all 
others have filled their souls with rev- 
erence and holy awe. However it might 
have been with others in the congrega- 
tion, we can scarcely imagine that any 
but the devoutest sentiments should 
have penetrated their spirits in view of 
the transactions in which they were 
engaged. Yet in the midst of it all 
they sinned a sin, the enormity of which 
is most effectually proclaimed by the 
tremendous punishment which it imme- 
diately drew after it. They were struck 
dead with their censers in their hands, 
without a moment's warning ! What a 
fearful exhibition of the truth, that 
God's jealousy burns fiercest about his 
altar ! 

But the question occurs as to the real 
nature of the offence for which they 
perished. In what did it consist? — a 
point on which it is not easy to give a 
perfectly satisfactory decision. The 
text simply informs us that they ' offer- 
ed strange fire before the Lord, which 
he commanded them not.' What this 
was we shall shortly endeavor to show ; 
but we may here remark, that in all 
probability their crime w^as of a com- 
plicated nature. From a careful in- 
spection of the context, it would appear, 
that their sin is not to be resolved into 
any one form of disobedience, but that 
it involved a number. And in the first 
place, it would seem that there was 
ground for the belief suggested by most 
commentators, that they had indulged 
too freely in wine. This seems to be 
reasonably inferred from the solemn 
prohibition, v. 9, 10. ' Do not drink v/ine 
nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons 
with thee, when ye go into the taberna- 
cle of the congregation, lest ye die: it 
shall be a statute for ever throughout 
your generations : And that ye may put 
difference between hol)^ and unholy, and 
between unclean and clean.' The con- 
jecture therefore is very plausible, that 
they had rendered themselves incapable 



84 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



of the due discharge of their duty by 
intemperance ; that they had partaken 
of the drink-offerings to a criminal ex- 
cess j and thus become incapacitated to 
put a difference between holy and un- 
holy, and between clean and unclean. 
If there be truth in this supposition, 
what a commentary does it afford on 
the pernicious effects of stimulating 
liquors, especially when used by the 
ministers of the altar ! By clouding 
the moral perceptions, and inflaming 
the passions, they render their willing 
subject capable of any sacrilege or im- 
piety, and thus expose him to the aveng- 
ing stroke of an outraged Divinity ! 

At the same time, we should hardly 
infer from the tenor of the sacred story, 
that this, although an element, was the 
essence of their crime. There is some 
reason to suppose that, apart from the 
quality of the fire which they brought, 
there was a rash intrusion, and a reck- 
less irregularity in their going forward 
to officiate at the time, and in the man- 
ner they did. The whole transaction, 
as recorded, has an air of abruptness 
and precipitancy, as if they rushed upon 
the service without waiting for instruc- 
tions, either from Moses or Aaron j and 
as if they were encroaching upon the 
functions of the high-priest. If by the 
phrase * offered before the Lord,' be 
meant, as some suppose, that they ad- 
vanced within the most Holy Place, and 
there presumed to offer incense before 
the Shekinab, this certainly was a bold 
invasion of Aaron's prerogative, and 
one that would of course expose them 
to be at once cut off for their hardihood. 
This idea receives some countenance 
from Lev. 16. 1, 2, where we are told 
that ' the Lord spake unto Moses after 
the death of the two sons of Aaron, 
when they offered before the Lord, and 
died : and the Lord said unto Moses, 
Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that he 
come not at all times into the holy 
place within the vail, before the mercy- 
seat, which is upon the ark ; that he 
die not : for I will appear in the cloud 



upon the mercy-seat.' Whether this be 
the correct inference or not, we have no 
evidence from any other part of the 
ritual that more than one priest was to 
officiate in burning incense at the same 
time, and here they are represented as 
entering together upon a service to 
which it does not appear that either of 
them was now called. 

But laying aside every thing that is 
uncertain in the affair, we find a definite 
and aggravated offence laid to their 
charge. They sinned by offering strange 
fire before the Lord. Instead of filling 
their censers with coals from the altar, 
where a supernatural fire had been 
kindled from heaven, and which was 
always to be used in burning incense, 
they contemptuously disregarded this 
ordinance, and filled their vessels with 
common fire. This was the head and 
front of their offending, whatever minor 
accessaries of guilt may have accom- 
panied it. 

But where, it is said, is this act ex- 
pressly forbidden? Is it any where 
ordered, in so many words, that only 
one kind of fire should be employed in 
the services of the sanctuary? And if 
there was no express precept violated, 
wherein consisted the essential crim- 
inality of their conduct ? In reply to 
this, we answer (1.) That in the phrase 
commanded not,' we recog- 



* which he 
nize 



according 



to the idiom of the 
sacred writers, a clear intimation that 
the thing in question had been expressly 
forbidden. This is the true force of 
the expression, as we shall evince in 
our note on the passage. (2.) In Ex. 
30. 9, it is commanded that no ' strange 
incense ' should be presented, and the 
implication would be inevitable, from 
the nature of the case, that Estrange 
fire ' was equally contrary to the divine 
will. But not only so. From Lev. 16. 
12, 13, we learn that on the day of atone- 
ment, the priest was to ^ take a censer 
full of burning coals of fire from off the 
altar before the Lord, and his hands full 
of sweet incense beaten small, and 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER X. 



85 



CHAPTER X. 
4 ND aNadab and Abihu, the 
•^^ sons of Aaron, t> took either of 

a ch. 16. 1, and 22. 9. Numb. 3. 3, 4, and 
26. 61. 1 Chron. 24. 2. b ch. 16. 12. Nam. 
16. IS. 

bring it within the vail : And he shall 
put the incense upon the fire before the 
Lord, that the cloud of the incense may 
cover the mercy-seat that is upon the 
testimony, that he die not.' The order 
contained in this passage was indeed 
given subsequent to the event we are 
now considering, but the presumption 
obviously is, that this was the standing 
usage which had been ordained from 
the first institution of the legal rites, 
and as to which it is not conceivable 
that Aaron's sons should have been 
ignorant. And as the fire miraculously 
kindled on the altar was to be kept per- 
petually alive, what other inference 
could have been drawn, than that from 
this source was all the fire to be derived 
which was employed in the sacred rites ? 
The fact that we do not meet with any 
such injunction in express terms, does 
not at all abate the force of the proba- 
bility that they were perfectly aware 
that such was the will of God in regard 
to this matter. 

The penalty which was inflicted upon 
the transgressors was indeed severe. 
But the case called for severity. The 
rank and station of the offenders was a 
high aggravation of their crime. It 
was their duty to set an example of 
scrupulous regard to the known will of 
God. They had been admitted to more 
intimate communion with God than 
others, and had seen more of the terrors 
of his power, more of the wonders of 
liis grace. Moreover, the Levitical in- 
stitute had been just established, and 
was now for the first time going into 
operation. It behoved, therefore, that 
every thing should be done in exact con- 
formity to the divine prescription. The 
sanctity of the whole system would be 
gone at once, if the ministry of it might 
8 



them his censer, and put fire there- 
in, and put incense thereon, and 
offered estrange fire before the 
Lord, which he commanded them 
not. 

c Exod. 30. 9. 

with impunity presume, in its setting 
out, to dispense with any of its fixed 
regulations. As, then, the deed was 
daring and high-handed in the extreme, 
so the expiation was proportionably 
fearful ; and the whole transaction most 
forcibly impresses upon us the apposite 
admonition of the apostle, ' Let us have 
grace whereby we may serve God ac- 
ceptably, with reverence and godly 
fear ; for our God is a consuming fire.' 

The Sin and Death of Nadab and 
Abihu o 
1. Took either of them his censer. 
Or, < fire-pan j^ a vessel in which coals 
of fire were put, to be sprinkled over 
with frankincense, in order to create an 
agreeable odor in the sanctuary. The 
event here mentioned probably occurred 
at the time of the evening sacrifice, 
when the lamps were lighted, and m- 
cense burned, unless, as some suppose, 
one part of their oflence was doing that 
at another time of day which was ap- 
pointed to be done in the morning or 

evening.- IT Offered strange fire. 

That is, other fire than that which the 
Lord had commanded. The Lord had 
sent a supernatural fire to consume the 
first victims offered to him. This was 
to be kept perpetually alive, and from 
it only were the coals to be taken for 
the burning of incense. Such, at least, 
might have been gathered to be the will 
of God, although the injunction, in so 
many words, is not expressly recorded 
in any part of the preceding narrative. 
It is probable, however, that an explicit 
command to this effect had been pre- 
viously given by Moses, though not 
mentioned. The command was after- 
wards expressly recorded. Lev. 16. 12, 
in allusion to which it is said, Rev. 8, 5, 



86 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



2 And there « went out fire from 
the Lord, and devoured them, and 
they died bclbre the Lord. 

3 Then iMoses said unto Aaron, 

d ch. 9. 'i4. Numb. 16. 35. 2 Sanu 6. 7. 



This is it that the Lord spake, 
saying, I will be sanctified in them 
e that come nigh me, and before all 

e Exod. 19. 2'2, and 29. 43. ch- 21. 6, 17, 21. 
Isai. 62. 11. Ezek. 20. 41, and 42. 13. 



the tabernacle shall be sanctified by my 
glory.' The words might have been 
previously spoken, but not written. 



* The angel took the censer and filled it 

with fire of the altar, ^ IT Which he 

commajuicd thciji not. This, by a figure 
of sjieech called mciosiSy is probably I Perhaps, however, all that is intended 
equivalent to saying, ' which the Lord 
had pointedly forbidden.' The foUow- 
ms, are instances of a similar usage : 
)0. ' He spared not their soul 



'5 

Ps. 78. 

from death ;' i. e. he destroyed them 
with desolating judgments. Prov. 12. 3. 
* A man shall not be established by 
wickedness ;' i. e. he shall be over- 
thrown. Prov. 17. 21. ' The father of 
a fool hath no joy ;' i. e. hath grief and 
sorrow. In these cases under a nega- 
tive form of expression, the contrary 
affirmative is emphatically implied. 

2. There went out fire from before 
the Lord. That is, from the Shekinah, 
the symbol of the divine presence, be- 
fore which they had presumed to offer 
the strange fire upon the altar of in- 
cense. This stood in front of the most 

holy place, just without the vail. 

IT And devoured them. The action of 
the fire in this instance was peculiar, as 
neither their bodies nor thoir clothes 
were consumed by it. Targ. Jon. * It 
burned their souls, but not their bodies.' 
It was a flash of preternatural fire from 
the cloud of glory that rested over the 

mercy-seat. IT Died before the Lord. 

That is, before the vail that covered 
the mercy-seat. 

3. This is it that the Lord spake. It 
does not appear from the record that 
these precise words were anywhere pre- 
viously spoken, although some suppose 
that reference is had to Ex. 19.22, ' Let 
the }>riests which come near the Lord 
sanctify themselves, lest the Lord break 
forth upon them.' Others again con- 
ceive that the words alluded to are 
found, Ex. 29. 43, ' And there will I 
meet with the children of Israel, and 



is, that this was the spirit and purport 
of what God had said, not on any par- 
ticular occasion, but in the general tenor 

of his instructions to the priests. 

IT I will be sanctified in them that come 
nigh me. Heb. np5^ ^-"ipn bikrohai 
ekkdddsh, in my near ones will I be 
sanctified. That is, those who approach 
near to God in the duties of a holy min- 
istration. Thus the Priests and Levites 
were such as are described Ezek. 42. 13, 
as ^approaching unto the Lord.' So 
also, Ex. 19. 22, ' Let the priests also, 
which come near to the Lord, sanctify 
themselves;' i. e. those whose office it 
is to come near to the Lord. So iu 
1 Pet. 4. 17, judgment is said to begin 
^ at the house of God ;' and in Ezek. 9. 6, 
* at the sanctuary.' God is said in the 
language of Scripture to be ' sanctified* 
by his people, when they demean them- 
selves holily and uprightly before him, 
duly regarding and reverencing every 
thing by which he makes himself 
known ; 1 Pet. 3. 15. * Sanctify the 
Lord God in your hearts,' &c. So also 
he is 'sanctified' when he righteously 
punishes those who transgress. Ezek. 
27. 22, ' Behold, I am against thee, 
Zidon, and I will be glorified in the 
midst of thee ; and they shall know 
that I am the Lord, when I shall have 
executed judgments in her, and shall be 
sanctified in her.' So also Ezek. 38. 
16. 23, ' I shall bring thee against my 
land, that the heathen may know me 
when I shall be sanctified in thee, O 
Gog, before their eyes. Then will I 
magnify myself, and sanctify myself j 
and I will be known m the eyes of 
many nations.' God will either be 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHArXER X. 



87 



the people I will be f^rloritied. 
gAiui Aaron held his peaeo. 

4 And Closes ealled .Mishael and 
Elzaphan, the sons of i^ Uzziel the 
uncle of Aaron, and said unto them, ' 
Come near, i carry your brethren 
from before the sanctuary out o( 
the camp. 

5 So they went near, and carried 
them in their coats out of the camp ; 
as IMoses had said. 

f IsRi. 49. 3. Eick. as. n, John 13. 31, 
Si, ami 14 13. Thcss. 1. 10. ? Ps. 39. 9. 
h Exod. 6. IS. '2'^ Xumb 3. 19. 30. i Lwke 
7. 1-2. Act,^ 5. G. 9, 10, ami S. 1'2. 

sanclitied by all his creatures in a w^uy 
of active reverence, obedience, and 
praise, or upon ibem in a way of ven- 
geance and wrath. IT And Aaron held 

his peace. Heb. D*l*^ yiddomy teas 
hushfd, silent, quiescent. The original 
word is that which occurs Josh. 10. 13, 
in reference to the standing still of the 
sun and moon at the command of 
Joshua, on which see Note. The mean- 
ing is that he yielded in quiet submis- 
sion, without a murmur, to the just 
judgment of heaven in bereaving him 
of his sons. So the Psalmist, Ps. 34. 9. 
* I u\is dumb, I opened not my mouth, 
because thou didst it.* 

4. Carry your brethren from before, 
4*c. That is, your kinsmen. This order 
was given to the cousins of Nadab and 
Abihu, rather than to their immediate 
brethren, both that their feelings might 
be cousukcd, and that they might not 
be called off from their ministrations at 
the altar. Yet as these sons of Uzziel 
were merely Levites, and not priests, it 
would have been unlawful for them to 
enter into the sanctuary except in con- 
sequence of a special command of 
Moses. 

5. Carried them in their coats out of 
the catnp. That is, in the tunics or 
linen garments in which they minister- 
ed, and in which they were doubtless 
buried, as they would be considered as 
henceforth unfit for any kind of sacred 



6 And Moses said unto Aaron, and 
unto Eleazarand unto Ithamar, his 
sons, k Uncover not your heads, 
neither rend your clothes ; lest ye 
die, luid lest i wrath come ujion all 
the people: but let your brethren, 
the Avhole house oi'Israel, bewail 
the burning which the Loud hath 
kindled. 

7 u^And ye shall not go out from 
the door of the tabernacle of the 

k Exod. 33 5. ch. 13. 4o, and CI. 1. 10. 
Numb. C. C, 7. Dout. 33. 9. E/.ok. 24. lo, 17. 
1 Xumb 10. 'J'J. 4o. Josh. 7. 1, aud*2'2. IS. -20. 
'2 Sain. '24. 1. mch.il. 12. 



service, whereas in ordinary cases the 
cast-off dresses of the priests were con- 
verted into wick lor the lamps oi' the 
sanctuary. 

6. Uncover fiot your heads. Heb. 
ly^Srin ^5^ al tiphnlu. Gt. ovk a-TOKu^iU 
pc^)rsTr, put not oxr the mitres. The 
original word for uncover, which pri- 
marily signifies to make free, and which 
is more fully explained in the Note on 
Jud. 5. 2, would seem also to imply a 
prohibition against leiiing the hair be- 
come disarrayed or dishevelled, as was 
customary in bewailing the dead. The 
meaning we suppose to be, ' Let none 
of the usual sigus of grief or mourning 
be seen upon you ;' for the reason, pro- 
bably, that the crime of their brethren 
was so highly provoking to God, and so 
fully merited the punishment which he 
had intlictcd, that their mourning might 
be considered as a retiection upon the 
divine justice towards the ofienders. 
The rending of the clothes was another 
sign of sorrow, as appears from Lev. 

13^. 45, and 21. 10; Sam. 13. 2\. 

IT Let your brethren, S'C. While Aaron 
and his sous, for otiicial reasons, were 
forbidden to assume the badges of 
mourning, the congregation at large 
were permitted and connnanded to do 
it. They must lament not only the 
loss of their priests, but especially the 
displeasure of God which had occa- 
sioned It. 



88 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



congregation, lest ye die : nfor the 
anointing oil of the Lord is upon 
you. And they did according to 
the word of Moses. 
8 II And the Lord spake unto 
Aaron, saying, 

n Exod. 28. 41. ch. 8. 30. 

7. The anointing oil of the Lord is 
upon you. That is, ye are devoted by 
a solemn unction to the service of God, 
which is not to be omitted out of respect 
to any earthly relation ; whereas, should 
you leave your official station before its 
duties are fully performed, it would be 
no other than showing greater affection 
and respect to a dead friend than to the 
living God. The injunction contained 
in these two verses seems to have be- 
come a standing law for the priests ever 
after. This is evident from Lev. 21. 
10, 12, ' And he that is high priest 
among his brethren, upon whose head 
the anointing oil was poured, and that 
is consecrated to put on the garments, 
shall not uncover his head, nor rend his 
clothes. Neither shall he go out of the 
sanctuary, nor profane the sanctuary of 
his God ; for the crown of the anointing 
oil of his God is upon him.* 

8. And the Lord spake unto Aaron. 
Hitherto, the Lord on all such occasions 
had spoken to Moses ; but now seeing 
that Aaron had been very observant of 
every thing commanded him, and per- 
haps with a design to afford him some 
consolation under his heavy affliction, 
he does him the honor to speak imme- 
diately to him, especially as the pre- 
cept uttered had primary respect to the 
priests, of whom Aaron was head. 

9. L>o not drink wine. It is the gen- 
eral opinion of the Jewish commenta- 
tors, and not improbable in itself, that 
Nadab and Abihu had drank wine to 
excess on the occasion which resulted 
in their death, and that the present pro- 
hibition was grounded upon the circum- 
stance of their attempting to celebrate 
the divine service in a state of iuebria- 



9 Do not drink wine nor strong 
drink, thou, nor thy sons with thee, 
when ye go into the tabernacle of 
the congregation, lest ye die : it 
shall be a statute for ever through- 
out your generations: 

Ezek. 44. Ql. Luke 1. 16. 1 Tim. 3. 3. 
Tit. 1. 7. 



tion. The spirit of the precept requires 
of Gospel ministers that they be * sober j 
not given to wine,^ 1 Tim. 3. 2. 3. ' Lest 
they drink and forget the law, and per- 
vert judgment,' Prov. 31. 5 j lest they 
' err through wine, and through strong 
drink are out of the way,' Is. 28. 7. By 
its being forbidden to be used, however, 
on a particular occasion, it is implied 
that at other times it was not prohibited 
to them, as it was not expected that 
every priest should be a Nazarite. So 
under the Gospel, 1 Tim. 5. 23, ^ Drink 
no longer water, but use a little wine 
for thy stomach's sake, and thine often 
infirmities ;' where, however, it will be 
noted that the precept is specially 
guarded, both in respect to the quantity 

and the occasion. If Nor strong 

drink. Heb. ^^123 shekdr^ from ^"Dti 
shdkar^ to inebriate y signifying any 
kind of intoxicating drink, whether 
made of corn^ apples^ honey, dates, or 
oi\iQX fruits. One of the four prohibited 
drinks among the Mohammedans in 
India is called ^ Sakar,' which signifies 
intoxicating drink in general, but espe- 
cially date wine. The ancient Egyp- 
tians, as we learn from Herodotus, 
B. II. c. 77, made use of a liquor fer- 
mented from barley. Diod. Siculus, 
Lib. I. de Osir. observes that * where 
any region did not admit the growth of 
the vine, a drink was prepared from 
barley, not much inferior in flavor and 
efficacy to wine.' From the original 
word, ^ Sheker,' preserved in the Gr, 
and Lat. in the form of ^ Sikera,' and 
' Sicera,' is probably derived the English 
^ cider,' a term applied exclusively to 
the fermented juice of apples, and so 
also probably the word ^ sugar,' from 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER X. 



89 



10 And that ye may pput differ- 
ence between holy and unholy, and 
between unclean and clean ; 

11 qAnd that ye may teach the 
children of Israel all the statutes 
which the Lord hath spoken unto 
them by the hand of Moses. 

12 H And Moses spake unto 
Aaron, and unto Eleazar, and unto 
Ithamar, his sons that were left, 
Take rthe meat-offering that re- 
maineth of the offerings of the 
Lord made by fire, and eat it with- 
out leaven beside the altar : for sit 
is most holy : 

13 And ye shall eat it in the holy 
place, because it is thy due, and 
thy sons' due, of the sacrifices of 
the Lord made by fire : for * so I 
am commanded. 

P ch. 11. 47, and 20. 25. Jer. 15. 19. Ezek. 
22. 26, and 44. 23. q Deut. 24. 8. Neh. 8. 
2, 8, 9, 13. Jer. 18. 18. Mai. 2. 7. r Exod. 
29. 2. ch. 6. 16. Numb. 13. 9, 10. s ch. 21. 
22. t ch. 2. 3, and 6. 16. 

Fr. ^ Sucre.' IT When ye go into the 

tabernacle. That is, into the court of 

the tabernacle. IT Lest ye die. Lest 

ye do that which shall make you liable 
to be cut off by the vindictive hand of 
God, as in the melancholy instance be- 
fore you. 

10. That ye may put difference^ ^c. 
That is, that you may not by strong 
drink so cloud and darken your under- 
standings, as to disqualify yourselves 
from distinguishing in your ministra- 
tions between that which is sacred and 
that which is common ; or from • sepa- 
rating between the precious and the 
vile.' As the word, however, in the 
original has the causative form, it im- 
plies also that they were not to incapa- 
citate themselves from teaching the 
people to make the due discrimination. 
Thus Ezek. 44. 23, * And they shall 
teach my people (the difference, or, 
how to distinguish) between the holy 
and the profane, and cause them to dis- 
cern between the unclean and the clean.' 
With neglecting to do this, the priests 



14 And « the wave-breast and 
heave-shoulder shall ye eat in a 
clean place ; thou, and thy sons, 
and thy daughters with thee : for 
they be thy due, and thy sons' due, 
which are given out of the sacrifices 
of peace-offerings of the children 
of Israel. 

15 xThe heave-shoulder and the 
wave- breast shall they bring, with 
the offerings made by fire of the 
fat, to wave it for a wave-offering 
before the Lord ; and it shall be 
thine, and thy sons' with thee, by 
a statute for ever ; as the Lord 
hath commanded. 

16 ^ And Moses diligently sought 
y the goat of the sin-offering, and 
behold, it was burnt : and he was 
angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, 
the sons of Aaron which were left 
alive, saying, 

uExod. 29. 24, 26, 27. ch. 7. 31, 34. 
Numb. 13. 11. X ch. 7. 29, 30, 34. y ch. 9. 
3, 15. 

are thus charged, Ezek. 22. 26j ' Her 
priests have violated my law and have 
profaned my holy things ; they have 
put no difference between the holy and 
the profane, neither have they showed 
difference (taught the people the differ- 
ence) between the unclean and the 
clean.' 

12. And Moses spake unto Aaron, &c. 
The directions here given are repeated 
from those that were formerly deliver- 
ed, both because they were as yet but 
little practised in the sacred ceremo- 
nies, and therefore needed fuller instruc- 
tion, and because, from the pressure of 
their grief, they might possibly forget 
or neglect some pajt of the divine ordi- 
nances. 

16. Moses diligently sought. Inti- 
mating that he suspected some devia- 
tion from the prescribed rule. That 
rule was, that if the blood of the sin- 
offering of the people was brought into 
the holy place, as was that of the sin- 
offering for the priest, then the flesh 
was to be burned without the camp j 



00 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



17 z Wherefore have ye not eaten 
the sin-offering in the holy place, 
seeing it is most holy, and God 
hath given it you to bear the in- 
iquity of the congregation, to make 
atonement for them before the 
Loud ? 

18 Behold, a the blood of it was 
not brought in within the holy 
place : ye should indeed have 
eaten it in the holy place, b as I 
commanded. 

z ch. 6. 26, 29. a di. 6. 30. b ch. 6. 26. 



Otherwise it was to be eaten by the 
priest in the holy place. Now in the 
present instance, the blood of the goat 
was not brought into the holy place, 
and yet, it seems, it was burned without 
the camp, whereas it ought to have 
been eaten. 

17. God hath given it to you to bear 
the iniquity of the congregation. Gr. 
IV a a(i)£)<r]T€j that ye may take away. 
The phrase ' to bear iniquity,' often 
signifies to suffer punishment with- 
out forgiveness, as Ex. 28. 43, Lev. 
20. 19 ; but in the present instance its 
meaning is the reverse of this. It sig- 
nifies to bear away, to procure the re- 
mission of J the sins of the people. 
These sins were in some sense to be 
transferred to the priests as types of 
Christ, who 'bore our sins in his own 
body on the tree,' and of whom it is 
said, r Behold the Lamb of God, that 
taketh away the sins of the world.' 

19. And Aaron said unto Moses, &c. 
Moses charged the fault upon Eleazar 
and Ithamar, but it is probable they 
acted by Aaron's direction, and there- 
fore he apologized for it. In this he 
makes his afiliction his excuse. He 
supposed that as fasting before the 
Lord required a joyful frame of heart, 
his being at this time overwhelmed 
with sorrow, would render him unfit to 
eat of the holy things ; that he could 
not do it without polluting them. And 
from the following passages it would 
appear that such an impression was 



19 And Aaron said unto Moses, 
Behold, c this day have they offered i 
their sin-off'ering, and their burnt- 
offering before the Lord; and such 
things have befallen me : and if I 
had eaten the sin-offering to-day, 

ti should it have been accepted in 
the sight of the Lord? 

20 And when Moses heard that, 
he was content. 

c ch. 9. 8, 12. d Jer. 6. 20, and 14. 12- Hos. 
9. 4. Mai. 1. 10, 13. 

not without foundation. When the hal- 
lowed things were brought according to 
the precept, Deut. 26. 14, the offerer 
was required to say, ^ I have not eaten 
thereof in my mourning.^ And when 
God would refuse the sacrifice of the 
wicked, he says, Hos. 9. 4, ^ They shall 
be unto them as the bread of mourners ; 
all that eat thereof shall be polluted.' 
Moses accordingly admitted the force 
of his plea, and acquiesced in it with- 
out hesitation. ^ Such things have 

befallen me. Chal. * Such tribulations 
have befallen me.' Jerus. Targ. * Great 
sorrow hath this day befallen me, for 
that my two sons are dead, and I mourn 
for them.' IT Should it have been ac- 
cepted in the sight of the Lord 1 Heb. 
nin^ -HD^^D :lt)^^n hayitab belne Ye- 
hovah, should it have been good in the 
eyes of Jehovah ? Jerus. Targ. * Lo, 
if I had eaten the sin-offering to-day, 
were it possible that it could be accept- 
able and right before the Lord?' 

20. He was content. Heb.l^ri^^^llD'i'i 
yitab beenauv, it was good in his eyes, 
Gr. rip£<j€v avT(o, it pleased him. So in 
other cases the letter of the law was 
dispensed with from the pressure of 
circumstances, as when David ate the 
show-bread, and Hezekiah admitted 
some that were not duly cleansed, to 
eat of the passover. 2 Chron. 30. 18-20. 

Remarks.— (1.) The most joyful 
and festive scenes may be suddenly 
clouded and turned to gloom by the 



B. C. 1490,] 



CHAPTER XL 



91 



unexpected inroad of divine judgments. 
Let us therefore rejoice with trembling. 

(].) 'Which he commanded not.' 
How dangerous to innovate upon, or 
tamper with, the institutions of Heaven! 
God is peculiarly jealous of the purity 
of his ordinances, and watches with 
avenging vigilance around the worship 
of his altar. He will accept of no 
* strange fire,' either in the matter or 
motives of the offerings presented to 
him. 

(2.) Nadab and Abihu sinned by 
strange fire, and were punished by 
strange fire. Men's punishments are 
often marked by a striking analogy 
with their sins. 

(3.) The mind and will of God is 
sometimes to be learned by inference 
from the general scope and tenor of his 
word, instead of express revelation j 
and we are not to suppose that an act 
or a practice may be lawfully indulged 
in, because it is not, in so many words, 
forbidden in the Scriptures. The ques- 
tion is, does the general spirit of the 
Bible forbid it? Of this, every man 
must judge as in the sight of God, and 
act accordingly. 

(3.) It is of infinitely m.ore conse- 
quence that the Most High should be 
sanctified, and his name glorified, than 
that the lives of our children, however 
dear to us, should be preserved. 

(3.) The most comforting considera- 
tions under affliction, are those which 
are drawn from the word of God. There 
is no such source of consolation to 
mourners as his own precious truth. 

(6.) ' Uncover not your heads.' The 
public concerns of God's glory should 
lie nearer our hearts than any private 
griefs, pleasures, or pursuits. The 
' sorrow of the world ' is often a great 
hindrance to the performance of re- 
ligious duties. 



CHAPTER XL 

The distinction of living creatures 
into clean and unclean, forming the 
basis of the dietetical system of the 



Jews, is the subject mainly treated in 
the present chapter. As this is a sub- 
ject of great importance in the Mosaical 
institutes, we shall consider it at some 
length, particularly in reference to the 
design of the distinctions here estab- 
lished, and the principles involved in 
them. And we remark, in the outset, 
that the distinction of the animal tribes 
into clean and unclean, is founded not 
so much upon any thing in the nature 
of their habits, as more or less cleanly, 
but upon the circumstance, that one 
class of them was to be eaten for food, 
and the other not. This appears very 
plainly from vv, 46, 47, of this chapter, 
where the whole is summed up : ' This 
is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl , 
and of every living creature that moveth 
in the waters, and of every creature 
that creepeth upon the earth j to make 
a difference between the unclean and 
the clean, and between (i. e. even be- 
tween) the beast that may be eaten and 
the beast that may not be eaten.^ The 
latter clause explains the former, show- 
ing, that to say a beast may be eaten 
or not eaten, is equivalent to saying it 
is clean or unclean. These epithets 
are undoubtedly tantamount to usual, or 
not usual, for food ; and consequently 
the distinction is not one with which ice 
are entirely unacquainted ; for by using 
some species of fiesh-meat on our tables 
and rejecting others, v/e do in effect 
make this very distinction, though we 
do not express it in the same form of 
words. Indeed it does not appear that 
any animal is forbidden for food in this 
chapter, which Abraham or his de- 
scendants in any previous period were 
probably in the habit of eating ; so that 
these precepts, like many others in the 
Pentateuch, merely convert national 
custom into positive law, with perhaps 
some slight exclusions on the one hand 
and admissions on the other. 

If, then, to declare an animal clean 
or unclean, was merely to pronounce it 
fit or unfit to be eaten, it follows that 
there was nothing contemptuous or de- 



92 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



grading in the use of the epithet unclean 
in this connexion. Nor is there any 
greater mistake than to suppose that 
the Jews were forbidden to keep un- 
clean animals in their houses or stalls, 
or to have any thing to do with them. 
On the contrary, the camel, and the 
ass, and, in later times, the horse, were 
their common beasts of burden, though 
all the three species were unclean. In- 
deed, as Michaelis observes, in this 
sense man himself was the most unclean 
of all creatures, for he was lacking in 
the physical conditions of a clean ani- 
mal, and none but a cannibal would ever 
think of such a horrid profanation as 
eating human flesh. 

In considering the design of the enact- 
ments contained in this chapter, con- 
verting ancient customs into immutable 
laws, we may safely admit that it was 
mainly to keep the Hebrews more per- 
fectly separate from all other nations. 
They were to continue a distinct people 
by themselves, dwelling all together in 
Palestine, and having as little inter- 
course as possible with the neighboring 
nations. There was, indeed, an end 
ulterior to this to be answered by their 
isolation from the rest of the world. 
God intended by this arrangement that 
they should be preserved from idolatry, 
and the concomitant vices then so fear- 
fully rife among the Canaanitish tribes. 
This is clearly intimated Lev. 20.25, 2Qj 
in immediate connexion with the warn- 
ing, ' Ye shall not walk in the manners 
of the nations which I cast out before 
you : for they committed all these 
things, and therefore I abhorred them.' 
He then proceeds to say, * Ye shall 
therefore put difference between clean 
beasts and unclean, and between unclean 
fowls and clean : and ye shall not make 
your souls abominable by beast or by 
fowl, or by any manner of living thing 
that creepeth on the ground, which I 
have separated from you as unclean. 
And ye shall be holy unto me : for I 
the Lord am holy, and have severed 
you from other people, that ye should 



be mine.' And in a subsequent part of 
the sacred narrative, we learn the 
actual effect that followed from the 
overleaping of this separating wall, 
Num. 25. 2, 3 : ' And they called the 
people unto the sacrifices of their gods : 
and the people did eat, and bowed down 
to their gods. And Israel joined him- 
self unto Baal-peor : and the anger of 
the Lord was kindled against Israel.' 

To compass the object of separation, 
therefore, nothing could be better adapt- 
ed than the enactment of laws interdict- 
ing the use of certain articles of food 
common among other tribes, which the 
rites of hospitality would naturally be 
sure to urge upon them. They were 
regulations, therefore, tending directly 
to break up all social intercourse be- 
tween them and their idolatrous neigh- 
bors. ^ Intimate friendships,' says Mi- 
chaelis, * are in most cases formed at 
table ; and with the man with whom I 
can neither eat nor drink, let our inter- 
course in business be what it may, I 
shall seldom become so familiar as 
with him whose guest I am, and he mine. 
If we have, besides, from education, an 
abhorrence of the food which others eat, 
this forms a new obstacle to closer in- 
timacy.' 

The editor of the Pictorial Bible 
(Mr. Kitto) confirms this remark by 
the results of his own experience : ' The 
truth of this observation must be obvious 
to every person acquainted with the 
East, where, on account of the natives 
regarding as unclean many articles of 
food and modes of preparation in which 
Europeans indulge, travelers or residents 
find it impossible to associate intimate- 
ly with conscientious Mohammedans or 
Hindoos. Nothing more effectual could 
be devised to keep one people distinct 
from another. It causes the difference 
between them to be ever present to the 
mind, touching, as it does, upon so 
many points of social and every-day 
contact J and it is therefore far more 
efficient in its results as a rule of dis- 
tinction than any difference in doctrine, 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XL 



93 



worship, or morals, which men could 
entertain. While the writer of this 
note was in Asia, he had almost daily- 
occasion to be convinced of the incalcu- 
lable efficacy of such distinctions in 
keeping men apart from strangers. A 
Mohammedan, for instance, might be 
kind, liberal, indulgent 5 but the recur- 
rence of a meal or any eating, threw 
him back upon his own distinctive prac- 
tices and habits, reminding him that 
you were an unclean person from your 
habits of indulgence in foods and drinks 
forbidden to him, and that his own 
purity was endangered by communica- 
tion with you. Your own perception 
of this feeling in him is not to you less 
painful and discouraging to intercourse, 
than its existence is to him who enter- 
tains it. It is a mutual repulsion con- 
tinually operating ; and its effect may 
be estimated from the fact, that no 
nation, in which a distinction of meats 
was rigidly enforced as part of a re- 
ligious system, has ever changed its 
religion. Oriental legislators have 
been generally aware of the effect of 
such regulations ; and hence through 
most parts of Asia we find a religious 
distinction of meats in very active ope- 
ration, and so arranged as to prevent 
social intercourse with people of a dif- 
ferent faith. In the chapter before us 
it is not difficult to discover, that the 
Israelites, in attending to its injunc- 
tions, must be precluded from social 
intercourse with any of their neighbors. 
As to the Egyptians, they had them- 
selves a system of national laws on this 
point, which restrained them from in- 
tercourse with strangers. They could 
not eat with the Israelites, even in the 
time of Jacob. Some of the animals 
which the Israelites were allowed to 
eat, the cow, for instance, were never 
slaughtered by the Egyptians, being 
sacred to some god ; while, on the other 
hand, the Israelites were interdicted 
some animals which the Egyptians ate 
freely. Then as to the Canaanites or 
Phcenicians, they seem to have eaten 



not only those meats prohibited by 
Moses, which we usually eat, but also 
others, of which the flesh of dogs was 
one. With regard to the Arabs, they 
were nearly related to the Israelites, 
and their practices were less corrupt 
than those of the Egyptians and Ca- 
naanites, whence the difference of food 
is not so strongly marked ; but still it 
was quite enough to hinder the intimacy 
of the two nations. The camel not 
only constitutes the principal wealth 
of the Arabs, but its flesh is a prin- 
cipal animal food j besides which they 
eat the hare, and the jerboa — all these 
are forbidden in this chapter, the last 
under the name of ^ mouse.' If even at 
this distance of time we can discover 
such differences between the diet of the 
Hebrews and that of their neighbors, 
we may easily conceive that a more 
intimate acquaintance with the diet of 
the latter would exhibit more important 
and numerous distinctions.' 

Subordinate to the above was another 
end to be answered by the prohibition 
of the unclean class of animals, viz., 
the furnishing of the covenant people 
with a code of wholesome dietetics. 
Not, however, that this reason holds in 
regard to all the prohibitions relative to 
unclean beasts j for it cannot be ques- 
tioned that among the animals denom- 
inated unclean, there were many which 
might safely and salubriously be used 
for food, and which are so used by 
different people at the present day. It 
is also to be observed that diet connects 
itself with climate, temperament, and 
general habit, in such a manner, that 
what is innocent or salutary in one re- 
gion, or one state of society, would be 
decidedly noxious in another. Yet that 
dietetical considerations did actually 
enter into the reasons of these appoint- 
ments, is the unanimous opinion of the 
ancient Jews, and is a point which 
Maimonides especially labors to prove. 
(Mor. Nevoch. p. 3, ch. 48.) There 
can be no question, at any rate, that we 
are thus to account for the prohibitioa 



94 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



of swine's flesh. It has long been con- 
ceded that the use of this food favors 
the spread of cutaneous diseases, par- 
ticularly where any circumstances of 
predisposition from climate or tempera- 
ment exist. So also there is good rea- 
son to believe that the use of pork tended 
to produce the leprosy, a disease which 
is presently to come before us in a 
diiferent connexion, and which was of 
so shocking a nature, that too severe 
precautions could not well be taken to 
prevent it. Indeed, we think it would 
be found, on a thorough investigation, 
that the nutriment afforded by the flesh 
of the interdicted animals in general 
was less wholesome, and more favorable 
to the production of scrofulous and 
scorbutic disorders, than that of almost 
any included in the list of permitted 
meats. That the Divine Legislator 
should have regard to the well-being of 
his people in this respect, and should 
enact such laws as would tend to guard 
them from the inroads of epidemic and 
contagious disease, will appear reason- 
able to the slightest reflection, espe- 
cially when we consider that his care 
extended, in other matters, to the mi- 
nutest points that related to their per- 
sonal safety and comfort ; as, for in- 
stance, to the articles of their apparel 
and the style of their building. Nor is 
it to be forgotten that the situation of 
the people under the Levitical code 
created a peculiar exigency in this re- 
spect. Through the whole period of 
their wanderings in the wilderness, the 
encampment was very much in the 
condition of a crowded garrison, and 
the breaking out of a violent epidemic 
among them would have been equally 
easy and destructive; Every tendency, 
therefore, to such an occurrence was to 
be guarded against with the most vig- 
ilant care. And even when settled in 
Canaan, the Jcavs were still to be a very 
compact population, inhabiting a terri- 
tory small in proportion to their num- 
bers, and therefore equally needing a 
rigid health police as a security against 



the ravages of fatal epidemics among 
them. 

In addition to the above considera- 
tions, some have been disposed to re- 
cognize another, in the alleged fact that 
the eating of certain animals exercises 
a specific influence on the moral tem- 
perament ; as if, for instance, the use 
of camels' flesh — an animal said to be 
of a revengeful temper — tended to im- 
part a vindictive propensity to the eater, 
and of that of the swine to render one 
gross and sensual. But of this fact 
there is too little positive proof to make 
it of much account in this connexion. 
That such an influence may be exerted 
to a certain degree, and in certain 
forms, need not perhaps be denied ; but 
is probably too slight to come within 
the range of reasons which dictated the 
present discriminations. 

But in seeking for the designs of In- 
finite Wisdom in the regulations before 
us, we do not feel restrained from taking 
into view certain moral and typical con- 
siderations which we doubt not weigh- 
ed, in their measure, with the Most 
High in the establishment of these dis- 
tinctions. It is a remark of Ainsworth, 
that ' by beasts are spiritually signified 
peoples of sundry sorts ; and by eating 
or not eating, is meant communion with 
or abstaining from them, as by the 
vision showed unto Peter the Holy 
Ghost expounded this law.* In this 
vision, it will be recollected, the apostle 
saw a great white sheet let down to the 
earth, containing all manner of four- 
footed beasts, creeping things, and 
fowls of the air, and heard at the same 
time a voice commanding him, not- 
withstanding his scruples, to rise, kill, 
and eat, for that that which God had 
cleansed was no longer to be accounted 
common or unclean. Immediately after 
this supernatural exhibition, the apostle 
went, under the direction of the Spirit, 
to the house of Cornelius, a devout 
Roman, whom God had chosen into 
that Christian church, of which the 
visionary sheet was a figure, from its 



B. C. 1490J 



CHAPTER XL 



95 



I comprehending people of all nations, 
gathered from the four winds or quar- 
ters of the earth, and symbolically in- 
closed in white linen, to signify the 
Christian purity and rectitude. Having 
entered the house of Cornelius, he ob- 
served to those present, ^ Ye know how 
that it is an unlawful thing for a man 
that is a Jew to keep company or to 
come unto one of another nation ; but 
God hath showed me that I should not 
call any man common or unclean.^ 
Here we have an apostolical comment 
upon the purport of this vision. God 
had showed him that he should call no 
living creatures unclean ; but by these 
beasts of all kinds he understands men 
of all nations — and in this his interpre- 
tation no doubt accorded with the drift 
of the Holy Spirit in prompting the 
vision. We are conducted then at once 
to the inference, if the liberty was now 
granted to Peter of feeding upon the 
flesh of unclean animals, as the sign of 
a newly opened intercourse between the 
Jews and the Gentiles, that it was the 
original intention of the contrary pro- 
hibition to forbid the Hebrews holding 
fellowship with heathen and idolaters. 
For a permission in one of these cases 
would not imply a permission in the 
other, unless it had been v/ell under- 
stood that a restraint in the one had 
always implied a restraint in the other. 
To say that animals formerly prohibited 
as unclean might now be eaten, was in 
effect to say that the heathen might 
now be safely conversed with and 
preached to. Consequently the contrary 
injunction, that these creatures should 
not be eaten, w^as equivalent to a verbal 
command that the people of God should 
abstain from all familiar intercourse 
with the heathen world. 

All this is doubtless very obvious. 
Under the Jewish economy this rigid 
interdict of fellowship with the Gentiles 
obtained. Under the gospel dispensa- 
tion it is done away ; and accordingly, 
when this event is predicted by Isaiah, 
he represents it under the image of a 



preternatural reconciliation between the 
clean and the unclean species of ani- 
mals. Is. 11 . 6-9, ' The wolf also shall 
dwell with the lamb, and the leopard 
shall lie down with the kid ; and the 
calf and the young lion and the fatling 
together j and a little child shall lead 
them. And the cow and the bear shall 
feed ; their young ones shall lie down 
together : and the lion shall eat straw 
like the ox. And the sucking child 
shall play on the hole of the asp, and 
the weaned child shall put his hand on 
the cockatrice's den. They shall not 
hurt nor destroy in all my holy moun- 
tain : for the earth shall be full of the 
knowledge of the Lord, as the waters 
cover the sea.' 

But why are certain animals select- 
ed as fitting types of heathen tribes, 
and accordingly denominated unclean ? 
Nothing is more certain than that the 
uncleanness attributed to brute crea- 
tures is not actual and inherent j for 
they innocently follow their several 
instincts — the wolf when it devours the 
lamb, and the swine when it wallows 
in the mire. The instinct of the wolf 
is not cruelty, but appetite j and the 
foulness of the swine is as blameless as 
the scent of the dunghill. Yet on these 
very accounts they serve as striking 
symbols of bad men, who by imitating 
the vicious or loathsome propensities 
of certain brutes, sink themselves from 
the dignity of men and Christians, to a 
level with ' the beasts that perish.' 
We see, then, an intrinsic aptitude in 
certain animals to shadow forth certain 
classes of men ; and if the unclean 
beasts represented thus symbolically 
the depraved Gentiles, the clean ones, 
on the same principle, would stand as 
the appropriate type of the upright and 
obedient Israelites ; and hence the 
peculiar pertinency and force of our 
Savior's direction to his disciples, * Go 
not into the way of the Gentiles, but go 
rather tothe lost sheep of the house of 
Israel.' 

But let us descend to a closer survey 



96 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



of the particulars of this institution, and 
see what animals are assigned to the 
respective classes, and how their quali- 
ties, symbolically understood, corres- 
pond with the character of the different 
persons whom they are intended to 
represent. The chapter before us pre- 
sents on the good and peaceable side, 
amongst the clean creatures, the ox, the 
sheep, the goat, the lamb ; all fishes 
with fins and scales, and of the fowls, 
the dove, the pigeon, the lark, &c., 
whose habits are agreeable, and their 
flesh grateful. On the other side we 
find arrayed the dog, the swine, the 
wolf, the fox, the lion, the tiger ; of 
birds, the vulture, the kite, the raven, 
the owl, the bat j of reptiles, the whole 
serpent tribe, with the eel and the 
water-snake ; and finally all insects and 
worms, and the various species of tes- 
tacea. 

In regard to all these, and many other 
creatures of kindred species, it is evi- 
dent, upon the bare recital, that their 
properties and instincts render them 
most striking representatives of the 
several classes of men intended to be 
set forth by them ; and yet we have in 
the outset of this chapter a still more 
compendious mode of distinguishing 
the quadrupeds, by certain external 
characteristics, strikingly indicative of 
their internal natures and dispositions. 
Here we see that those only were ad- 
mitted into the clean class of animals 
which divide the hoof and chew the cud. 
Creatures of this class, it is well known, 
are generally marked by a harmless and 
tractable disposition, besides being of 
the utmost service to man for domestic 
purposes ; and it might be sufficient to 
insist upon these properties alone as a 
ground for the distinction in their favor. 
But we see no reason to doubt that the 
distinguishing traits of these animals 
are expressive also of the moral endow- 
ments wdiich are prominent in the sub- 
jects represented. Certain it is, that 
an animal with a cloven hoof is more 
inoffensive with its feet than the several 



tribes of wild beasts whose paws are 
armed with sharp claws to seize their 
prey, or than the horse, whose feet are 
such formidable weapons of offence ; 
or the dog, who, though not armed 
with claws, like the bear or tiger, is 
yet furnished with feet of great swift- 
ness, fitting him to pursue and destroy 
such creatures as are gentle and de- 
fenceless. 

Again, another peculiar characteris- 
tic of clean beasts, is that of chewing 
the cud — a faculty so expressive of that 
act of the mind by which it revolves, 
meditates, and reasons upon what it 
receives within it, that the word rumi' 
nate, from rumen, the stomach, distinc- 
tive of this class of animals, has be- 
come an established metaphorical term 
in our language, by which to express 
the act of the mind in studious medita- 
tion or pondering. An animal thus 
employed has remarkably an air of 
abstraction in its countenance, as if 
engaged in some deep meditation ; so 
that we cannot well conceive of a more 
fitting symbol of that attribute of a 
good man which disposes him to the 
devout contemplation of sacred things, 
and which the Psalmist so graphically 
portrays, Ps. 1.2,* His delight is in the 
law of the Lord, and in his law doth he 
meditate day and night.'' The word of 
God is the true pabulum of the pious 
soul ; and when John in vision took the 
little prophetical book from the angePs 
hand, and ate it, we see by the effects 
produced, that the profound study of 
its contents, as laden with announce- 
ments of woe, could embitter to the 
stomach what was exquisitely grateful 
to the palate ; thus teaching us that the 
pleasure of knowing is sometimes coun- 
terbalanced by the pain of the things 
known. 

It would doubtless be easy to extend 
the application of these remarks to the 
several orders of terrestrial, aerial, and 
aquatic creatures which come into the 
enumeration before us ; but as our 
preface to the present chapter has 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XL 



97 



CHAPTER XL 

A ND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
•^^ ses and to Aaron, saying unto 
them, 

2 Speak unto the children of 
Israel, saying, a These are the 

a Deut. 14. 4. Acts 10. 12, 14. 



already far exceeded our usual limits, 
we content ourselves with what has 
already been offered. The illustrations 
given afford but another evidence of the 
consummate wisdom and benignity 
which shine through the appointments 
of the Levitical code. 

The Distinction of Clean and Unclean 
Animals. 

1 . The Lord spake unto Moses and to 
Aaron. As joint representatives of the 
magisterial and priestly power. The 
cognizance of the following injunctions 
belonged to both. The Priest was to 
direct the people where any doubt oc- 
curred as to things forbidden or allowed, 
and the Magistrate was to see that the 
direction was followed. Comp. Num. 
9. 6, 2 Chron. 29. o,— 30. 18, Ezek. 44. 23. 

2j 3. These are the beasts which ye 
shall eat among all the beasts, &c. The 
Heb. has here two distinct words for 
^ beasts,' n^)l ^haydh, and n^H!^ behe- 
mahj a distinction which is wholly 
lost sight of in our version, and the 
same is the case in the Septuagint. 
The first properly implies living crea- 
tures in general, whether beasts^ fishes, 
fowls, or creeping things j the second 
denotes quadrupeds only, especially 
those of the domestic kind, usually 

denominated cattle. IT Whatsoever 

parteth the hoof, &c. The first grand 
rule of distinction laid down has respect 
to quadrupeds, and is this — that all 
beasts that have their feet completely 
cloven, above as well as below, and at the 
same time chew the cud, were to be ac- 
counted clean. Those which had nei- 
ther, or indeed were wanting in one of 
these distinguishing marks, were to be 
held unclean. The parting of the hoof, 
9 



beasts which ye shall eat among 
all the beasts that are on the earth. 
3 Whatsoever parteth the hoof, 
and is cloven-footed, and cheweth 
the cud among the beasts, that 
shall ye eat. 



however, in order to bring them within 
the specified class, must be perfect, as 
is intimated by the additional epithet 
' cloven-footed,' or as the Heb. has it, 
' that cleaveth asunder (i. e. entirely 
asunder) the cleft of the hoofs.' A 
division of hoof contrary to that which 
is here required is to be seen in the foot 
of the dog, the cat, and the lion, where, 
though there arc several distinct toes 
or claws on the upper side, yet they are 
united by a membrane on the lower 
side. The parting, therefore, is not 
perfect. Whereas in the foot of the ox, 
the sheep, and the goat, the cleaving 
extends quite through the foot, and as 
far below as above. Animals of hoofs 
wholly solid, andunparted, as the horse, 

were of course unclean. IT Cheweth 

the cud. Heb. tT^^i ^{^^12 maalath 
gerah , making the cud to ascend. That 
is, such animals as bring up again the 
cud from the stomach to the mouth, to 
be more thoroughly masticated, as is 
the case with the ox, and the other 
ruminating animals. The original 
word, n^3 gerah, comes from a root 
signifying to draw, from the chewed 
mass being again drawn up into the 
mouth to be remasticated ; and the Gr. 
fxr]pvKi(T[jLos is equivalent, being derived 
from [Jirjpvu, to revolve, to turn, to toss 
over, expressive of the action of the 
animal's organs upon the cud. Indeed, 
the word ^ ruminate ' is derived from 
rumen, the name of the first stomach in 
the ox or camel, into which the food is 
first received, and thence cast up into 
the mouth. The word ' cud * is sup- 
posed to be derived either from the 
Cambro-British chuyd, a vomit, as it is 
the ball of food vomited or thrown up 
into the mouth from the stomach ; or a 



98 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



4 Nevertheless, these shall ye not 
eat, of them that chew the cud, or 
of them that divide the hoof: as 
the camel, because he cheweth the 



contraction of chewed, from the verb to 
chew. — ^ The reader will not fail to ob- 
serve, that the beautifully simple and 
scientific division of quadrupeds here 
stated on divine authority at so early a 
period; is one which has never yet, after 
all the improvements in natural history, 
become obsolete ; but, on the contrary, 
is one which the greatest masters of 
the science have continued to consider 
useful. Michaelis says this is ' won- 
derful.' But it is not wonderful when 
we recollect who was its author — not 
Moses, but God. It would have been 
wonderful if, as Michaelis seems to 
think, it evinced the progress which 
men had then made in the science of 
natural history j but it is in fact very 
doubtful whether the Israelites, or even 
Moses himself, understood the princi- 
ples on which the distinction was 
established. After stating the general 
principle, a few examples are given to 
illustrate its application.' — Pict. Bib. 

4. Nevertheless these shall ye not eat, 
&c. Having stated the general princi- 
ple, the writer goes on to illustrate its 
application. When either of the speci- 
fied conditions were wanting, whether 
in whole or in part, viz., if a beast 
chewed the cud, but had not its hoof 
perfectly parted in two, as the camel, 
the coney, and the hare, or if its hoof 
were parted, and yet it did not chew the 
cud, as the swine ; then they were pos- 
itively interdicted, and the touching 
their dead carcasses caused such a de- 
filement as legally disqualified one 
from engaging in the worship of the 
tabernacle till he were ceremonially 
cleansed. But in the case of certain 
quadrupeds, a doubt might arise whe- 
ther they do fully divide the hoof or 
ruminate. Whether the hare, for ex- 
ample, ruminates, is a point not easily 



cud, but divideth not the hoof; he 
is unclean unto you. 

5 And the coney, because he 
cheweth the cud, but divideth not 
the hoof; he is unclean unto you. 

settled ; and so while the camel rumi- 
nates, the requisite parting of the hoof 
might be a matter subject to considera- 
ble doubt. In point of fact, the foot of 
the camel is divided into two toes, and 
the division below is complete, so that 
the animal might be accounted clean ; 
but then it does not extend the whole 
length of the foot, but only to the fore 
part ; for behind it is not parted, and 
we find besides under it, and connected 
with it, a kind of cushion or elastic 
pad, on which the camel goes. Now 
in this dubious state of circumstances, 
Moses authoritatively decides that the 
camel has not the hoof fully divided ; 
and so of the other animals mentioned 
in the sequel. The accompanying 
figure will give a tolerably correct idea 
of the form of this animaPs foot. 




The Camel's Foot. 
5 The coney. Heb. "pll^tl hashsha- 
phan. In reference to this animal we 
give the note of Mr. Kitto on Prov. 30. 
26, ' The conies are but a feeble folk, 
yet make the}^ their houses in the rocks.' 
— ^ It is on the sole authority of the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XL 



99 



6 And the hare, because he chew- 



Rabbinical writers that the Heb. "plD 
shaphan has been identified with the 
coney, or rabbit. That this conclusion 
cannot be correct is very evident. The 
rabbit is not an Asiatic animal, and it 
is very far from being solicitous of a 
rocky habitation, which is the distin- 
guishing characteristic by which the 
shaphan is here mentioned . Some there- 
fore, who reject this explanation, sup- 
pose the Jerboa to be intended ; and 
this opinion has the sanction of Bochart, 
probably from his being unacquainted 
with the DamaUj or Hyrax Syriacus, 
which corresponds far better than any 
other animal that has been found to the 
brief intimations which the Scriptures 
convey. Daman is the Syrian name of 
the animal : the Arabs call it Ndbr, and 
the Abyssinians Ashkoko. The same 
species is found in Lebanon, among the 
mountains and rocks of Syria and Pal- 
estine, in those of Arabia and Abyssinia, 
and probably extends to Southern Afri- 
ca. Under its Abyssinian name of 
Ashkoko, a very full description of the 
animal has been given by Bruce, and 
the general accuracy of his account has 
been attested by more recent observa- 
tions. He strongly advocates its iden- 
tity with the shaphan ; and shows how 
inapplicable the Scriptural intimations 
are to the rabbit. Its size corresponds 
nearly to that of the hare ; and its gene- 
ral color is gray mixed with a reddish 
brown, but white under the belly, and 
blackish about the fore feet. It is so much 
an animal of the rock, that Bruce says he 
never saw one upon the ground, or from 
among the large stones at the mouth of 
the caves, holes, and clefts of the rock, 
in w^hich it resides. They are grega- 
rious animals, living in families ; they 
appear to subsist on grain, fruits, and 
roots ; and certainly chew the cud, as 
the shaphan is said to do in Levit. 11.5. 
Bruce says that they do not appear to 
have any cry j and adds, that they do 



eth the cud, but divideth not the 
hoof; he is unclean unto you. 

not stand upright in walking, but seem 
to steal along, as in fear,-svith the belly 
near the ground, advancing a few steps 
at a time, and then pausing. ^ They 
have something very mild, feeble-like, 
and timid in their deportment ; are 
gentle cind easily tamed, though when 
roughly handled at first, they will bite.' 
Possibly it is to this that Agur refers 
in calling them ' a feeble folk :' although 
perhaps this may rather allude to their 
feet, which are described as being soft 
and tender, very liable to be hurt and 
excoriated, and which do not enable the 
animal to dig its own habitation, as 
the rabbit does ; and in this sense, the 
text would mean that the shaphan, be- 
ing disqualified by the feebleness of its 
feet from scooping out its own habita- 
tion in the plain, has the sagacity to 
seek in the mountain, habitations ready 
formed or completed with ease, not- 
withstanding that the sharp asperities 
of the rocks among which it is thus led 
to dwell, might be supposed hurtful to 
its feet. However this be explained, 
it is certain that they are called ' ex- 
ceeding wise,' with reference to their 
choice of habitations peculiarly suited 
to their condition : and they might be 
particularly mentioned in this view from 
the fact that animals of the class to 
which they belong, are usually inhabit- 
ants of the plains. The flesh of the 
shaphan was forbidden to the Hebrews ; 
and, in like manner, the Mohammedans 
and Christians of the East equally ab- 
stain from the flesh of the daman. Cu- 
vier has some interesting observations, 
showing the resemblance, on a small 
scale, of this animal's skeleton to that 
of the rhinoceros ; and says there is no 
animal which m.ore clearly proves the 
necessity of anatomy for determining the 
true conformities of animals.'-Pzc^. Bib, 
6. The hare. Heb. TDlJlS^ arnebeth, 
supposed to be compounded of u^U^ 
ardhj to crop, and n'^D nibj the produce 



100 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



7 And the swine, though he divide 
the hoof, and be cloven-footed, yet 



of the ground. ' The propriety of this 
denomination will appear from the de- 
vastations which in various times and 
countries hares are recorded to have 
committed. The reason given for their 
rejection is, that, though they chew the 
cud, they do not divide the hoof— that 
is, that their foot has too many divi- 
sions — an undivided hoof and a foot 
with more than a complete division into 
two parts being equally rejected. The 
statement that the hare does chew the 
cud has been disputed by naturalists. 
Michaelis, who says that no two sports- 
men concur in giving the same answer 
on the subject, considers it one of those 
doubtful cases, which, as in the case of 
the camePs foot, the legislator was 
obliged to decide authoritatively. But 
the poet Cowper, who domesticated 
three tame hares, and studied their hab- 
its with great attention, affirms that 
^ they chewed the cud all day till even- 
ing,' thus confirming the decision of the 
Hebrew legislator. The use of the hare 
for food is not forbidden to Mohammed- 
ans in their Koran, and is distinctly al- 
lowed, by the example of Mohammed 
himself, in the ^ Mischat-ul-Masabih,' 
but the Moslem doctors have classed its 
flesh among meats which, although not 
legally forbidden, are abominable. Dr. 
Russell, who does not seem to be aware 
of this fact, in his ' Natural History of 
Aleppo,' attributes the abstinence of 
the Turks from the hare merely to dis- 
like. It is however remarkable, that 
the Bedouin Arabs, the Eelauts of Per- 
sia, and other Mohammedan nomades, 
who in general pay little attention to 
religion, pursue hares with great eager- 
ness, and eat them openly without the 
least scruple. The animals are found 
in considerable numbers in the deserts 
of Western Asia, which these nomades 
inhabit, or through which they fre- 
quently pass. They are usually dressed 



he cheweth not the cud; che is 
unclean to you. 

c Isai. 65. 4, and 66. 3, 17. 



entire, without any preparation ; being 
baked in a hole dug in the ground for 
the purpose : and thus cooked are re- 
lished by all nomades.' — Pict. Bib. 

7. The swine. Heb. ^'^TM ^hazir, 
' The prohibition of the hog is by no 
means peculiar to the Hebrews. All 
their neighbors, the Egyptians, the 
Arabs, and the PhcEnicians, concurred 
in disliking the hog, and interdicting its 
use. The principal reason for the 
prohibition was probably dietetical. 
It was a remark made by the an- 
cient physicians, and confirmed by the 
modern, that persons who indulged 
in pork were peculiarly liable to le- 
prosy and other cutaneous disorders. 
Michaelis observes on this subject, 
' Whoever is afflicted with any cutane- 
ous diseases must carefully abstain 
from swine's flesh if he wishes to re- 
cover. It has likewise been long ago 
observed, that the eating of swine's 
flesh produces a peculiar susceptibility 
of itchy disorders. Now, in the whole 
tract of country in which Palestine lies, 
something more to the south, and some- 
thing more to the north, the leprosy is 
an endemic disease: in Egypt it is 
peculiarly common, and the Israelites 
left that country so far infected with it, 
that Moses was obliged to make many 
regulations on the subject, that the 
contagion might be weakened, and the 
people tolerably guarded against its 
influence,' He adds, * every physician 
will interdict a person laboring under 
any cutaneous disease from eating pork ; 
and it has been remarked in Germany, 
that such diseases are in a peculiar 
manner to be met with in those places m 
where a great deal of pork is eaten.' ^ 
Michaelis also observes, that, although 
pork was forbidden as food, the Hebrews 
were not forbidden to keep swine as 
articles of trade. We agree that they 
might do so, but that they actually did 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XL 



101 



8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, 
and their carcass shall ye not touch ; 
"^ they are unclean to you. 

9 H e These shall ye eat, of all 
that are in the waters : whatsoever 
hath fins and scales in the waters, 
in the seas, and in the rivers, them 
shall ye eat. 

10 And all that have not fins nor 
scales in the seas, and in the rivers, 
of all that move in the waters, and 

d Isai. 52. 11. See Matt. 15. 11, 20. Mark 
7. 2, 15, IS. Acts 10. 14, 15, and 15. 29. 
Rom. 14. 14, 17. 1 Cor. 8. 8. Col. 2. 16, 21. 
Heb. 9. 10. c Deut. 14. 9. 



is not very likely, when the neighboring 
nations were equally averse to pork 
with themselves. But we think the 
extent of this aversion has been exag- 
gerated. The Mohammedans detest 
the hog quite as much as it was possi- 
ble for the Jews to do, and none are 
kept for any purpose by them ; but if 
they encounter a wild hog, they will 
capture it alive or dead, and carry it, 
even in their arms, to Christians, either 
for sale, or as an acceptable present. 
The only pork we ever tasted, while 
residing in Mohammedan Asia, was 
procured in this manner from Moslems. 
There is nothing in the law to prevent 
the Jews from doing the same, if they 
knew persons by whom pork might be 
eaten. It is true, that if ,they touched 
an animal not allowed for food, they 
became unclean till the evening ; but 
this was equally the case if they touched 
a human corpse, or even the carcass of 
an animal fit for food, unless it had been 
slaughtered in the usual way. There 
was nothing to prevent them from 
handling hogs or any other unclean ani- 
mals while alive.' — Pict. Bib. 

Distinction of Fishes. 
9 — 12. These shall ye eat, of all that 
are in the waters. In these verses the 
sacred writer lays down the distinction 
that was to be made in regard to fishes. 
All that have scales and fins were to be 
accounted clean, and all others unclean 
9* 



of any living thing which is in the 
waters, they shall be an f abomina- 
tion unto you : 

11 They shall be even an abomi- 
nation unto you : ye shall not eat 
of their flesh, but ye shall have 
their carcasses in abomination. 

12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor 
scales in the waters, that shall he 
an abomination unto you. 

13 IF gAnd these are they which 
ye shall have in abomination among 
the fowls; they shall not be eaten, 

f ch. 7. 18. Deut. 14. 3. S Deut. 14. 12. 



— a distinction equally clear, simple, 
and systematic. Even to this day fish 
with fins and scales are generally re- 
garded as wholesome and often deli- 
cious, while others that difier in these 
particulars are looked upon with disgust, 
and occasionally with horror, under a 
belief that they are sometimes poison- 
ous. It is interesting to remark how 
the sentiments of mankind do generally, 
in this matter, coincide with the divine 
precept. 

Distinction of Fowls. 

13. These are they which ye shall 
have in abomination among the fowls. 
Heb. t|15>n yz min hdoph, of the fowl, 
collect, singular. The ordinance re- 
specting birds difiers from the others in 
the absence of any particular distinc- 
tion of clean and unclean. It merely 
specifies, for the sake of prohibiting, 
certain species of known birds, leaving 
it to be understood that all others were 
allowed. But even in regard to the 
permitted species, it is now so difiicult 
to ascertain them, that we cannot re- 
sist the inference that the Law itself 
must be considered as abrogated j for 
there is probably not a Jew in existence 
who is able to identify the different 
classes here mentioned. And the same 
remark holds good in respect to many 
of the animals and insects designated 
in this chapter. They must find them- 
selves therefore in the predicament of 



102 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



they are an abomination : the eagle, 
and the ossifrage, and the ospray, 

being bound to abstain from eating the 
flesh and coming in contact with the 
carcasses of various orders of animals 
and birds, and yet perfectly ignorant 
what they are, and not knowing but 
they are continually breaking the law 

every day ! IT The eagle. Heb. ^'^D 

ntsher^ from the obsolete root IID;] 
ndshar, to lacerate^ to tear in pieces, as 
the eagle with its talons and beak. 
The Heb. term, however, has a broader 
acceptation, and comprehends also a 
species of vulture, especially in those 
passages where the IIZJ^ nesher is said 
to be bald, Mic. 1. 16, and to feed on 
carcasses, Job. 39. 27, Prov. 30. 17 
(Comp. acTog, Mat. 24. 28.) As the 
character and habits of the eagle, the 
king of birds, may be learned in detail 
from the common works on natural his- 
tory, the reader is referred to them for 
all the further information he may de- 
sire. Comp. Note on Deut. 32. 11. 

^ The ossifrage. Heb. D'HS peres, from 
D'lS paras, to crush, or break, equiva- 
lent to which is * ossifrage,' bone-break' 
er, in our version, from the Lat 'os,' 
bone, and ' frango,' to break. This is 
one of the most difficult to be identified 
of all the birds in the list. The Tar- 
gum of Onkelos, and the Sept. and Vulg. 
versions read it ' vulture,' in which the 
majority of versions concur. Others 
think it denotes the ' black eagle,' and 
some the ' falcon.' Mr. Kitto decides 
in favor of the ' great sea-eagle,' a bird 
about the size of the golden eagle, and 
inhabiting the clifis and promontories 
along the sea-shore. It is spread over 
the northern parts of Europe and Asia. 

IT The ospray. Heb. H'^iT^!' oz- 

niyyCih. The ospray, or fish-hawk 
(Pandion haliceetus,) is a native of 
both continents. The upper parts of its 
body are of a rich glossy brown ; the 
tail barred with brown of different 
shades, while the under parts are v/hite. 
It subsists entirely upon fish, which it 



14 And the vulture, and the kite 
after his kind ; 

seizes by darting down with incredible 
velocity upon them. Some think the 
black eagle is here intended j but the 
probabilities are at least equally in 
favor of our version. 

14. The vulture. Heb. t^UCi dddh, 
with the import oi jiying, or rather of 
sailing with expanded wings through 
the air, and in Deut. 14. 13, Hi^^ rdcih, 
with that of seeing ; but whether from 
its remarkable powers of vision, or by 
an easy interchange of the similar let- 
ters 1 d and 1 r, is uncertain. The 
Chal. here follows the Heb. giving i^tl'^l 
daitha, but in Deut. 14. 13, it renders by 
5<&5!D n^ bath kanpha, daughter of the 
wing* The Gr. renders it by yv\p, and 
the Lat. Vulg. by ' Milvus,' a kite, 
which, from its signification when used 
as a verb, seems to be very appropriate. 
This verb, when taken in its full appli- 
cation, denotes that kind of flight which 
is at once swift, varied, and majestic. 
Hence the term agrees vv^ell with the 
kite, or glede, which is characterized 
by the easy and sweeping motion with 
which it glides through the air. The 
kite (Milvus ictinus), though it preys 
upon the lesser animals, does not scru- 
ple to feed upon garbage, and therefore, 
in Egypt, it is often seen in company 
with the vultures when at their neces- 
sary and useful task of devouring the 
carrion and offal of meat, that they 
may not pollute the air by decomposi- 
tion. IT The kite. Heb. n'^i< ayyah, 

rendered in Job, 28. 7, ' vulture,' and 
that very properly. ' This is a splendid 
bird, diffused over the south of Europe, 
Turkey, Persia, and Africa. It feeds 
on putrid flesh, like the rest of the fam- 
ily ; and makes its nest in the clefts of 
the rock, from whence it can survey the 
distant plains, and mark the fallen prey. 
In length it is about three feet six inches, 
with an expanse of wings reaching to 
eight or nine. The color of the full- 
grown bird is a deep rufous gray, be- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XL 



103 



15 Every raven after his kind; 

16 And the owl, and the night- 
coming black on the quill-feathers and 
tail. The head and neck are not entirely- 
bare, but are covered with a short close 
down, and the beautiful ruff is of a pure 
white. Travelers, astonished at the ex- 
traordinary distance from which these 
birds can descry a carcass, have debated 
v/hether they were guided by sight or by 
scent J but the beautiful and picturesque 
accuracy of the Book of Job, on many 
points of natural history, seem here to 
afford us its high authority in ascribing 

it to the eye.'— -Picf. Bib. IT After 

his kind. This expression is doubtless 
used here for the purpose of including 
whatever different varieties there may 
chance to be under the same species. 
And so in the subsequent verses. 

15. The raven. Heb. ^"^^ orebf 
which, from its etymology, we might 
translate ' the bird of night,' an appel- 
lation which it owed to the tincture of 
its plumage, which was dark, like the 
livery of night, or li,^^ ereb. A word 
of the same origin is extended by the 
Arabian writers to the rook, crow, and 
jackdaw, as well as to the raven : in 
fact it seems to include all those spe- 
cies which are by Cuvier ranged under 
the genus Corvus. The predominant 
color of these is black, hence Ereb (the 
origin of the classic Erebus), implying 
a sable hue, is a very proper word as a 
generic appellation corresponding to 
Corvus. 

16. The owl. Heb. rl51^'^ mi bath 
hayyonah, daughter of the yonah. This 
bird is generally agreed to be the ' os- 
trich,' and to be so called fiom vocifera- 
tion, or the screeching, mournful noise 
which it makes, and which is implied 
in the original word rUSl"^ yonah. The 
comparatively little knowledge of natu- 
ral history enjoyed by the translators, 
must account for their rendering it 

'owl.' IT The night-hawk. Heb. 

G^^riln tahmdSf from a root implying 
rapine and violence. It was in all pro- 



hawk, and the cuckoo, and the 
hawk after his kind, 

bability a species of owl (Lat. Vulg. 
' noctua,') so called from its ravenous 
and predatory habits. Its scientific de- 
signation is the ^ Strix Orientalis,' thus 
described by Hasselquist : ' It is of the 
size of the common owl, and lodges in 
the large buildings or ruins of Egypt 
and Syria, and sometimes even in the 
dwelling-houses. The Arabs in Egypt 
call it ' Masasa,' and the Syrians ' Bana.' 
It is extremely voracious in Syria, to 
such a degree that if the windows be 
left open in the evenings, it flies into 
the houses, and even kills infants, un- 
less they are carefully watched ; where- 
fore the women are much afraid of him.' 

IT The cuckoo. Heb. tfTl'iD sha- 

^haph. As the Greek version renders 
this term by \apovj and the Vulgate by 
larus, we are led to suppose that some 
of the lesser kinds of sea-fowl are 
meant ; and from the nature of the 
original word, which denotes slender- 
ness and wasting, one would feel in- 
clined to think that the terns must be 
here alluded to. The terns (Sterna} 
are slender birds, and resemble, with 
their long wings and forked tail, the 
common swallow 5 whence they are 
called, in French and English, ' sea- 
swallows.' Some writers think the 
sea-mew is intended ; but Dr. Shaw in- 
clines to the saf'Saf— the name of which 
is not unlike the Hebrew of the text. 
This is a graminivorous and gregarious 
bird ; of which there are tw^o species 
described by the Doctor in his ' Travels,' 

p. 252. "TT The hawk. Heb. p netz^ 

from (1523=^-23 ndtzdh, to fly, supposed 
to be the common sparrow-hawk, which 
abounds over the old continent, and has 
long been noted for the celerity of its 
flight, and the activity with which it 
pursues its prey. 

17. Thelittleowl. Heb. G^i: A:o5, Gr. 
vvKTiKopa^. This was perhaps the com- 
mon barn-owl, well known in nearly all 
countries. Our version gives three 



104 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



17 And the little owl, and the 
cormorant, and the great owl, 

owls in two verses j but this appears to 
be the only real one. Some writers, 
however, think that the list of water- 
fowl begins here, and that the sea-gull 

is intended. IT The Cormorant. 

Heb. ^i^D shalakj from a root signify- 
ing to throWj cast, or dart down, and 
thence well applied to birds which dart 
down with great velocity upon their 
prey. Hence the Gr. KarappaKTrjgj the 
cataract, or the bird which precipitates 
itself upon its prey. Chal. ^i^iliblD sha- 

lenona, fish-hunter. ^ The great 

owl. Heb. il^'Tli;!^'^ yansuph, Gr. ipis- 
The sacred Ibis, so celebrated in ancient 
story, seems to be the bird intended — 
the Ibis religiosa of Cuvier. This bird 
was embalmed by the Egyptians ; and 
specimens have been preserved in a 
state of such perfection that not only 
the skeleton but the feathers might be 
studied, in order to ascertain its iden- 
tity with the living animal. It is about 
the size of a common fowl. While 
young, the neck is partially covered 
with down, or minute feathers, which 
fall off when the plumage is complete. 
The major part of its feathers are of a 
clear and spotless white. The head, 
bill, neck, and legs are of a deep black ; 
as are also the tips of the quill-feathers, 
with a violet reflection. The last four 
secondaries are of the same tincture, 
and by their length and silky nature 
form an elegant plume, mantling over 
the hinder parts of the body. 

18. The swan. Heb. n^:u::]n tinshe- 
meth. The Sept. renders this by 
TToprpvpiMva, the purple bird, a bird very 
famous among the ancients for the beau- 
ty of its plumage, which is indigo min- 
gled with red. It inhabits marshy sit- 
uations in the neighborhood of rivers 
and lakes, and is found universally in 
the Levant and the islands of the Medit- 
erranean. Michaelis, with whom Park- 
hurst is disposed to concur, thinks the 
goose is intended ; and hence infers 



18 And the swan, and the pelican, 
and the gier-eagle, 

that the modern Jews transgress their 
law in using goose-fat, in lieu of other 
fat or of butter, in their culinary pre- 
parations. IT The pelican. Heb. 

ri5<p kaath. As the root ni^p kdcih 
signifies to vomit, the name is supposed 
very probabljr to designate the ' pelican,' 
which receives its food into the pouch, 
under the lower mandible or jaw, and 
by pressing it on its breast with its bill, 
throws it up for the nourishment of its- 
young. Hence the fable which repre- 
sents the pelican as wounding her breast 
with her bill, that she may feed her 
young with her own blood ; a fiction 
which has no foundation but in the 
above circumstance. — ^ We have often 
seen one of the species sitting on the 
ledge of a rock, a foot or two above the 
surface of the water, in pensive silence 
during the whole day j the continuity 
of its proceeding being only interrupted 
at distant intervals by the near approach 
of some unlucky fish, upon which it 
darted with unerring certainty, and then 
resumed its wonted stillness. At other 
times we have observed them urging 
their way, with rapid flight, thirty or 
forty miles into the country, after a 
day's fishing, to feast in the lonely wil- 
derness upon the contents of their well- 
stored pouches : and were then reminded 
of the words, * I am like a pelican in the 
wilderness.' — Pict. Bib. IT The gier- 
eagle. Heb. tni ra'ham. By this 
term the Sept. understands the KVKvoq, 
the swan ; but as the root signifies ten* 
derness and affection, it is obviously 
intended to point out some bird noted 
for its attachment to its young. This 
applies very well to the ^ swan,' which, 
notwithstanding its meek and inoffen- 
sive disposition will, in defence of its 
young, give battle to the larger animals, 
and even to man himself. 

19. The stork. Heb. HI'iDn 'hasidah, 
from iDn ^hasad, which signifies to be 
full, abundant, exuberant in goodness^ 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XL 



105 



19 And the stork, the heron after 



kindness, affection.—^ The bird is an 
inhabitant of the warmer regions, but 

; often migrates to higher latitudes to lay- 
its eggs and hatch its young. It is par- 
ticularly abundant in Egypt and the 

-western parts of Asia, and is also well 

' known in different parts of Europe ; 
and, wherever found, its amiable and 
confiding disposition has secured it the 

) protection and esteem of man. No bird 
is more famous for its attachment to its 
young 5 and, which is more rare among 
birdsj for its kindness to the old and 
feeble of its own race. It has also 
acquired a sort of sanctity in different 
countries, not less perhaps from its 
grave and contemplative appearance 
than for its predilection for churches, 
mosques, and temples, on the roofs or 
towers of which — perhaps because they 
are in general the loftiest buildings — it 
usually prefers to establish its large 
and well-compacted nest. It also builds 
on the roofs of private houses ; and, in 
the East, on the wind- chimneys by 
which apartments are ventilated. This 
habit brings it into close connexion 
with man in Turkey and Persia ; in 
most parts of which countries people 
sleep at night on the flat roofs of their 
houses, and sometimes sit and amuse 
themselves there in the cool of the even- 
ing. The storks, although then full in 
view, and themselves observant of all 
that passes, do not on any occasion ex- 
hibit alarm or apprehension. This may 
as well be a consequence as a cause of 
the peculiar favor with which they are 
regarded. But certain it is, that in 
Turkey, Persia, Egypt, or indeed in 
any place, even in Europe, to Vv'hich 
these birds resort, a man would be uni- 
versally execrated who should molest a 
stork, or even disturb its nest during its 
absence. In some cases the law ex- 
pressly provides for its protection. It 
was exactly the same among ancient 
nations, the laws in some of which 



her kind, and the lapwing, and the 
bat. 

made it highly penal to kill a stork. 
It often appeared to us as if the Orien- 
tals in general regarded the stork as a 
sort of household god, whose presence 
brought a blessing upon the house on 
which it established its nest. They 
also do not overlook the importance of 
its services in clearing the land of ser- 
pents and other noxious reptiles, which 
form part of its food. Whether the law 
of Moses prohibited the stork as food, 
in order to protect its existence, or be- 
cause the nature of its food rendered it; 
unclean, it is impossible to determine : 
perhaps both reasons operated.'— P. Bib. 

IT The heron. Heb. rT^!:i< andphdh, 

' This bird is only mentioned here and 
in Deut. 14. 18 j and as in both places it 
is only named without the mention of 
any characterizing circumstance, very 
ample latitude has been allowed to con- 
jecture in all attempts to determine 
the species. The crane, the curlew, 
the woodcock, the peacock, the kite, 
the parrot, and the mountain falcon, 
have had their several claims advocated. 
The root anaph signifies to breathe 
short through the nostrils, to snort as 
in anger, and hence, to be angry ,• and 
this has led to the conclusion that a 
bird of angry dispositions must be in- 
tended. It seems to us so hopeless to 
identify the bird in this way, that we 
have no desire to disturb the common, 
reading which has as much and as little 
probability as any other. The disposi- 
tions of the heron are sufficiently irri- 
table to satisfy those who rest upon the 
etj^mology of the name. The bird is 
allied to the stork, and, like it, feeds 
on fish and reptiles, and is noted for its 
voracious appetite. The heron is found 
in most countries : in England it was 
formerly held in high estimation, its 
flesh being counted a great delicacy, 
and bore a price equal to that of the 
pheasant and curlew. Heronhawking 
was also a favorite amusement of kings 



106 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. a 1490. 



20 All fowls that creep, going 
upon all four, shall be an abomina- 
tion unto you. 

21 Yet these may ye eat, of every 
flying creeping thing that goeth 
upon all four, which have legs 
above their feet, to leap withal 
upon the earth; 

and nobles j on which account laws 
were enacted for the preservation of the 
species. A person destroying their eggs 
was hable to the then heavy fine of 
twenty shillings for each e^g. These 
birds are gregarious in the breeding 
season, and make their nests very near 
each other. They may be tamed when 
taken young : the ancient Egyptians 
used to keep them tame — apparently 
to assist in fishing ; and ^lian reports, 
that they so well understood the human 
voice as to become exceedingly angry 
when any person abused them or charg- 
ed them with laziness. If this was true 
at the time of the exodus, the bird must 
have been familiarly known to the Is- 
raelites, and the probability is thus 
strengthened that the heron is really 
intended.'— Pic/. Bih. ^ The lap- 
wing. Heb. n&'^in dukiphath. Gr. 
£7:o\p^ upupa. We may conclude this 
to be the hoopoe^ which is often met 
with in the writings of antiquity ; it is 
an elegant and animated bird, its head 
being surmounted with a beautiful crest 
of plumes, which by their varying mo- 
tion seem to express the feelings of the 
wearer. It is spread over all the warmer 
regions of the old continent, and occa- 
sionally visits this country. It is about 
twelve inches long, with a fawn-colored 
plumage, barred with black and white 
on the wings and lower parts of the 
back. Tail black, with a crescent of 
white at the base. Its food consists of 
insects, worms, and snails, and it was 
perhaps on this account forbidden as 

an article of diet. ^ The bat. Heb. 

tiitOS^ atall'eph, so called according to 
most lexicographers from two words 
implying ^iers in darkness. As Mo- 



22 Even these of them ye may 
eat ; ^ the locust after his kind, and 
the bald locust after his kind, and 
the beetle after his kind, and the 
grasshopper after his kind. 

23 But all other flying creeping 

h Matt. 3. 4. Mark 1. 6. 



ses begins his catalogue with the Eagle, 
the highest and noblest of the feathered 
race, so he ends with the Bat, which is 
the lowest, and forms the connecting 
link between the quadruped and vola- 
tile species. 

Distinction of Insects. 

20. All fowls that creep. That in- 
sects are here meant is plain from the 
following verse, and therefore the sense 
is, all those creatures which fly and 
also creep, « going upon all four,' i. e. 
creeping along upon their feet in the 
manner of quadrupeds, such as flies, 
wasps, bees, &c., together with all 
leaping insects ; these are to be avoided 
as unclean, with the exceptions in the 
two next verses. 

21. Which have legs above their feet 
to leap withal upon the earth. Insects, 
reptiles, and worms, are generally pro- 
hibited J but a previous exception is 
here made in favor of those insects, 
which besides four walking legs, have 
also two longer springing legs (pedes 
saltatorii) and which, under the name 
of ' locusts,' are declared clean. Those 
particularly enumerated seem to indi- 
cate the four leading genera of the 
locust family, of which the domestic 
cricket, the mole-cricket, the green 
grasshopper, and the locust may be 
taken as representatives. 

22. The beetle. Heb. d^^^D soldm. 
As this insect is never eaten, a sort of 
grasshopper or locust is probably in- 
tended ; as it is likely that either four 
species, or four difierent stages of the 
same insect, are intended by the four 
names in this verse. In Palestine, Ara- 
bia, and the adjoining countries, locusts 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XI. 



107 



things, which have four feet, shall 
he an abomination unto you. 

24 And for these ye shall be un- 
clean : whosoever toucheth the 
carcass of them shall be unclean 
until the even. 

25 And whosoever beareth aught 
of the carcass of them i shall wash 

are one of the common articles of food, 
and the people would be very ill off if 
precluded from eating them. When a 
swarm of them desolates the fields, they 
prove, in some measure, themselves an 
antidote to the famine which they occa- 
sion J so much so, indeed, that the poor 
people look forward with anxiety to the 
arrival of a swarm of locusts, as yield- 
ing them sustenance without any trouble. 
' They collect them in great quantities, 
not only for their own eating, but for 
sale in the ba2aars — for these insects 
are highly relished by all classes of 
people. In some towns there are shops 
exclusively for the sale of locusts. 
They are so prepared as to be kept for 
use a considerable time. There are 
different processes ; but the most usual 
in Western Asia is to throw them alive 
into a pot of boiling water, mixed with 
a good quantity of salt. After boiling 
a few minutes they are taken out, and 
the heads, feet, and wings being pluck- 
ed off, the trunks are thoroughly dried 
in the sun, and then stowed away in 
sacks. They are usually sold in this 
condition, and are either eaten without 
further preparation, or else are broiled, 
or stewed, or fried in butter. They are 
very commonly mixed with butter, and 
so spread on thin cakes of bread, and 
thus eaten, particularly at breakfast. 
Europeans have usually an aversion to 
the eating of these insects, from being 
unaccustomed to them 5 and we must 
confess that we did not ourselves re- 
ceive them at first without some repug- 
nance : but, separately from the ques- 
tion of usage, they are not more repul- 
sive than shrimps or prawns, to which 
they do, indeed, in taste and other 



his clothes, and be unclean until 
the even. 
26 The carcasses of every beast 
which divideth the hoof and is not 
cloven-footed, nor cheweth the cud, 
are unclean unto you: every one 

i ch. 14. 8, and 15. 5. Numb. 19. 10, 22, 
and 31. 24. 

qualities, bear a greater resemblance 
than to any other article of food to 
which we are accustomed.— The Israel- 
ites being in the peninsula of Sinai 
when they received this law, it is a 
rather remarkable fact that Burckhardt 
describes the present inhabitants of 
that peninsula as the only Bedouins 
known to him who do not use the locust 
as an article of food.' — Fict. Bib. 

23. Shall be an abomination to you. 
A thing to be loathed and abominated 
as being unclean by the ceremonial law. 
All insects appear to be included in this 
prohibition except the locustce. With 
the exception of these, few, if any, of 
the tribe of insects, properly so called, 
have ever constituted an article of hu- 
man food. 

Defilement from unclean Carcasses, 

24. For these ye shall he unclean. 
That is, those which follow, says Ains- 
worth ; and so Michaelis and most 
others understand it ; confining the un- 
cleanness to the dead bodies only of the 
beasts and reptiles after mentioned. 
Indeed if it were extended to the insect 
tribes mentioned v. 20-23, it would 
scarcely seem possible to have remained 
clean a single hour. But whoever ate 
any of the interdicted animals, or of the 
forbidden fowls or fishes, or came in 
contact with their dead carcasses, con- 
tracted thereby a legal uncleanness for 
that day ; nor wus he to be admitted 
to the worship of the sanctuary, nor to 
have intercourse with those who were, 
till he had purified himself by washing 
his clothes and his body, which he was 
to do forthwith. 

21, Whatsoever goeth upon his paws. 



108 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



that toucheth them shall be un- 
clean. 

27 And whatsoever goeth upon 
his paws, among all manner of 
beasts that go on all four, those 
are unclean unto you : whoso 
toucheth their carcass shall be un- 
clean until the even. 

28 And he that beareth the car- 
cass of them shall wash his clothes, 



Heb. 1^&)D ii5> al kappauv, upon his 
palms ; referring to those animals 
whose feet have a kind of resemblance 
to the human hand, such as lions, bears, 
dogs, cats, apes, monkeys, &c. 

Distinction of the creeping things. 

29. Among the creeping things that 
creep upon the earth. That is, those 
which have legs so short that they 
creep, as it were, with their bellies upon 
the ground, as the mole, the field-mouse, 

and the lizard tribe. IF The weasel. 

Heb. nin ^holedj from the Syriac "I^n 
^halad, to creep in. The Septuagint 
and the Vulgate agree in rendering this 
word by ' weasel,' though it is diihcult 
to see on what grounds they should 
have classified the weasel among rep- 
tiles. The opinion of Bochart is far 
preferable, who understands b}^ the ^Jn 
^holedj the mole, whose property of dig- 
ging into the earth, and burrowing 

under its surface is well known. 

IT The mouse. Heb. 1D^5> akhdr. Gr. 
Hvg. * There seems good reason to sup- 
pose that the mouse of Scripture was 
the Bipus sagitta or Jerboa, an animal 
about the size of a large rat, and char- 
acterized by the disproportionate short- 
ness of the fore-feet. Its color is a pale 
tawny-yellow, lighter on the under 
parts j the long tail is terminated by a 
tuft of black hair. The brevity of their 
fore-feet is compensated by the size and 
strength of the tail, by which, as in the 
case of the kangaroo, they are enabled 
to balance themselves in an upright po- 
sition. The form of the head and the 



and be unclean until the even: 
they are unclean unto you. 

29 H These also shall be unclean 
unto you among the creeping things 
that creep upon the earth; the 
weasel, and k the mouse, and the 
tortoise after his kind, 

30 And the ferret, and the chame- 
leon, and the lizard, and the snail, 
and the mole. 

k Isai. 66. 17. 

expansion of the ears impress them with 
some resemblance to the rabbit. They 
are very abundant in Egypt, Syria, and 
the north of Africa, and burrow in the 
sand or among ruins. Their flesh, 
though eaten by the natives of the East, 
is unsavory, and hence the interdiction, 
which forbade them as food, did not lay 
the necessity of much self-denial upon 
the Israelites. As this animal feeds 
exclusively on vegetable produce, a 
multiplication of its numbers could not 
fail to be highly injurious to cultiva- 
tion.'— Pzc^ Bib. ^ The tortoise. 

Heb. m^ tzab. Gr. KpoKoSeiXog, ^epcaios, 
crocodilus. Some member of the fam- 
ily of lizards is undoubtedly intended 
by this term, but the precise variety it 
is difficult to determine. Jarchi says 
it is a creature ^ like a frog,' and nearer 
to the truth we have no means of coming. 

IT After his kind. Gr. ra bixoia avrc^, 

things like unto it. 

30. The ferret. Heb. rip2J!^ andkdh, 
from pji^ (inak, to groan, to cry out ; 
a species of lizard, deriving its name 
from its piercing, doleful cry. Such a 
description of this animal is found in 
countries bordering on the Mediterra- 
nean, of a reddish gray color, spotted 
with brown. It is thought at Cairo to 
poison the victuals over which it passes, 
and especially salt provisions, of which 
it is very fond. It has a voice some- 
what resembling that of a frog, as is 

intim&.ted by its Hebrew name. 

IT The chameleon. Heb. XXO koa'h. Gr. 
')(^aiiai\ecxiv . Here again we are at a loss 
to identify the creature called a ' cha- 



B. C. 1490.J 



CHAPTER XL 



109 



31 These are unclean to you 
among all that creep : whosoever 
doth touch them, when they be 
dead, shall be unclean until the 
even. 

32 And upon whatsoever any of 
them, when they are dead, doth 



meleon ;' and as we are not likely to 
obtain any thing more certain, we may 
state the opinion of Kitto, who con- 
siders it a species of lizard, found in 
Arabia, Nubia, and Abyssinia, remark- 
able for the readiness with which it 
forces its way into the sand when pur- 
sued — an evidence of the strength and 
activity implied in its Hebrew name, 

which signifies force^ prowess. 

"^ The lizard. Heb. n&^tOp letddk. 
The original word signifies to adhere, 
and therefore may apply to a frightful 
and venomous species of lizard, well 
known in the East, covered with tuber- 
cles, and of a grey color. It lives in 
holes of the walls, and under stones, 
and covers itself v/ith dirt, which is 
perhaps alluded to by the sense of 

adhering conveyed in the name. 

IF The snail. Heb. tD/^H -homet. This 
V7ord in Chaldee signifies to bow down. 
It therefore suggests the Lacerta stellio, 
which is noted for bowing its head, in- 
somuch that the followers of Moham- 
med kill it, because they say it mimics 
them in the mode of repeating their 
prayers. It is about a foot in length, 
and of ail olive color shaded with black. 

^ The mole. lleh. T^)2^Djt) tinshe- 

meth, from utl'D ncisham, to breathe. 
We may therefore with m.uch proba- 
bility adopt the opinion of Bochart, and 
apply it to the chameleon, w^hich has 
lungs of such vast dimensions, that, 
when filled, the body is so maich dilated 
as to appear transparent. The varying 
capacity of their lungs enables them, 
by exposing a greater or less portion of 
blood to the influence of the air, to alter 
the tincture of the circulating fluid at 
pleasure, which when sent to the siir- 
10 



fall, it shall be unclean ; whether 
it be any vessel of wood, or raiment, 
or skin, or sack, whatsoever vessel 
it be^ wherein any work is done, 
1 it must be put into water, and it 
shall be unclean until the even; 
so it shall be cleansed. 

I ch. 15. 12. 



face must tend to give a color more or 
less vivid to the skin. The chameleon, 
or Lacerta Africana, is a native of 
Egypt, Barbary, and of the south of 
Spain. 

32, Upon whatsoever any of theiUj 
when they are dead^ doth fall, it shall 
be unclean. That is, it might not be 
used till it was cleansed. This, how- 
ever, was to hold only in regard to cer- 
tain kinds of vessels specified in this 
verse, viz. either such as were very 
solid, and v/ould not imbibe a scent so 
as to retain it for a long time, or such 
as were of great value, and could not 
easily be replaced. Others of a differ- 
ent description, such, for instance, as 
were very porous, or earthen vessels of 
little value, were to be broken to pieces, 
and thrown away. ' The great incon- 
veniences which the law connected with 
this and other defilements, necessarily 
obliged the Israelites to pay great at- 
tention to cleanliness: and this was 
probably w^hat the laws on this subject 
had principally in view. The import- 
ance of regulations on such points are 
not so fully appreciated in this country 
as in the East, v/here all kinds of rep- 
tiles, many of them poisonous, find their 
way into the most private apartments 
and conceal themselves in recesses, 
crevices, vessels, and boxes. Experi- 
ence taught the writer of this note, 
while in the East, to observe the great- 
est caution in examining a box or ves- 
sel, which had not very recently been 
disturbed, lest a scorpion, or other nox- 
ious reptile, might be concealed v/ithin 
it. On this subject, Michaelis observes 
that this law was well calculated to 
prevent accidents from poisoning : ' Of 



no 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



33 And every earthen vessel, 
wherein to any of them falleth, 
whatsoever is in it shall be un- 
clean ; and mye shall break it. 

34 Of all meat which may be 
eaten, that on which such water 
Cometh shall be unclean : and all 
drink that may be drunk in every 
such vesssel, shall be unclean. 

35 And every thing whereupon 
any part of their carcass falleth, 

m ch. 6. 28, and 15. 12. 

the poisoning of liquors by toads creep- 
ing into casks we often read ; and Has- 
selquist relates an instance where the 
poison of a Gecko in a cheese had 
nearly proved fatal. Mice and rats 
likewise sometimes poison meat that is 
uncovered, by means of the poison laid 
for themselves being vomited upon it. 
I remember the case of a brewing of 
beer, which, to all the people of a town 
Avho had drunk it, occasioned most vio- 
lent agonies ; and in regard to which, 
although it was most peremptorily de- 
nied by the magistrates and the brewers, 
there appeared perfectly good reason 
for believing that arsenic had in this 
manner got among the malt.' ' — P. Bib. 

34. Of all meat ivhich may be eaten, 
&c. The meaning undoubtedly is, that 
any meat which might otherwise be 
lawfully eaten, was made unclean if 
water poured out of any of the vessels 
named above was to come upon it. For 
the water coming out of a defiled vessel 
was thereby itself defiled, and commu- 
nicated defilement to the meat on which 
it fell. On the same principle, all drink 
that might be drunk from any such ves- 
sel was also unclean and defiling. 

35. Whether it be oven, or ranges for 
pots. Heb. 'D'^1'^^ Jcirayim. By this 
is probably meant a kind of hearth made 
of stones, where fires were made for 
boiling their pots or kettles. The ovens, 
on the other hand, were the contrivances 
for baking bread. 

36. Nevertheless, a fountain or pit, 
wherein there is plenty of water, shall 



shall be unclean ; whether it he 
oven, or ranges for pots, they shall 
be broken down : for they are un- 
clean, and shall be unclean unto 
you. 

36 Nevertheless, a fountain or pit, 
wherein there is plenty of water, 
shall be clean : but that which 
toucheth their carcass shall be un- 
clean. 

37 And if any part of their car- 
cass fall upon any sowing-seed 

be clean. Heb. d'^^ nip?a ^im X^'S^I^ 
mayavn u-bor mikvth mayim, a foun- 
tain or a pit, a gathering of waters. 
It is uncertain whether the * gathering 
of waters ' is intended to be understood 
of something distinct from the fountain 
or pit mentioned before, or whether it 
is merely exegetical of those terms. 
To us it seems more probable that it 
refers to pools, ponds, or lakes, and 
such like collections of Avaters. Ac- 
cordingly the Gr. renders it with an in- 
terjected ^ and * before ' gathering.* 
Tiiis will perhaps be more obvious when 
we consider the kind and mercilul drift 
of the provision. This was to afibrd 
the means of the speediest possible 
cleansing from the pollutions which any 
one might have contracted. For this 
end they were allowed to have recourse 
to any collection of waters, whether in 
pools, cisterns, or ponds, even although 
an unclean carcass might have fallen 
into it, or an unclean person may have 
just washed himself in it. Considering 
the scarcity of water in that country, 
if it had not been for such an allowance 
as this, it might have been extremely 
difficult for them to have performed the 
requisite ablutions after their defile- 
ments. IT But that which toucheth 

their carcass. Rather, ' whosoever 
toucheth,' referring to persons who 
drew out the carcass, instead of the in- 
strument employed for that purpose, 
as others understand it. So the Gr. 
6 a-rrronEvogj he that toucheth. 
37. Fall upon any sowing-seed. The 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XL 



111 



which is to be sown, it shall be 
clean. 

38 But if any water be put upon 
the seed, and any part of their car- 
cass fall thereon, it shall be unclean 
unto you. 

39 And if any beast, of which ye 
may eat, die ; he that toucheth the 
carcass thereof shall be unclean 
until the even. 

40 And u he that eateth of the 
carcass of it shall wash his clothes, 
and be unclean until the even; he 
also that beareth the carcass of it 
shall wash his clothes, and be un- 
clean until the even. 

n ch. 17. 15, and 22. 8. Deut. 14. 21. 
E7.ek. 4. 14, and 44. 31. 

same exception extended to the grain 
prepared for sowing. If a mouse, for 
instance, were found dead among a 
quantity of wheat, designed for sowing, 
it might still be used for that purpose. 
But other wheat, not intended for sow- 
ing, thus made unclean, might not be 
used, till it was cleansed by washing. 
In the case of the seed to be sown, it 
would of course pass through so many 
changes of state before it could become 
food, that the pollution might be sup- 
posed to be taken away of course. 

38. But if any water be put upon the 
seed. Wet seed might be supposed to 
have received some tincture from the 
carcass which dry did not j and not 
being in a fit condition to be sown till 
it was dry, it w^as in the mean time to 
be cleansed. Others, hov/ever, suppose 
the allusion here is not to seed-corn, but 
to such as was prepared for present 
food ; and this sense is perhaps counte- 
nanced by the original, which has * seed' 
in general, instead of ^ the seed,' as in 
our version, w^hich seems to restrict it 
to seed intended for sowing. 

39. If any beast of which ye may eat, 
die. That is, which either dies of 
itself, or is torn by Vv'ild beasts, or is 
suffocated, so that the blood remains in 
the veins. Such meat became unlawful 



41 And every creeping thing that 
creepeth upon the earth shall be 
an abomination ; it shall not be 
eaten. 

42 Whatsoever goeth upon the 
belly, and whatsoever goeth upon 
all four, or whatsoever hath more 
feet among all creeping things that 
creep upon the earth, them ye 
shall not eat ; for they are an 
abomination. 

43 o Ye shall not make yourselves 
abominable with any creeping 
thing that creepeth, neither shall 
ye make yourselves unclean with 
them, that ye should be defiled 
thereby. 

€h. 20, 25. 

not only to be eaten, but to be touched; 
the carcasses of unclean animals, whe- 
ther they died by disease or were killed ; 
but those of clean animals had this effect 
only when they died of themselves. 

40. He that eateth of the carcass of it. 
That is, ignorantly ; for if he did it 
knowingly and presumptuously, against 
the positive command, it constituted 
the high-handed offence against which 
the doom of excision, the most fearful 
penalty of the law, was threatened. 
Num. 15. 30, Deut. 14.21. 

41, 42. Every creeping thing. This 
rule is of course to be understood with 
the exceptions stated above, in vv. 21-24, 
and all creatures of the creeping kind 
that may be ranged under the three 
following classes; (1.) Those which 
move by the aid of the under part of 
the stomach and belly, as serpents. 
(2.) Those which, though they have 
four legs, nevertheless move like rep- 
tiles, as lizards, moles, &c. (3.) Those 
which move by short and almost imper- 
ceptible feet, as caterpillars, centipedes, 
millepedes, &c. The 42d verse seems 
to be merely explanatory of v. 41. 

43. Ye shall not make yourselves 
abominable. Heb.^lrj^niD^i l^ptDtl ^^ 
al teshakketzu naphthoshekem, ye shall 
not make abominable your souls. They 



112 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. ]4D0. 



44 For I am the Lord your God ; 
ye shall therefore sanctify your- 
selves, and 1' ye shall be holy ; for 
I am holy: neither shall ye defile 
yourselves with any manner of 
creeping thing that creepeth upon 
the earth. 

45 qFor lamtheLoiiDthatbring- 
eth you up out of the land of Egypt, 

pExod. 19. 6. ch. 19. 2, and 20. 7, 26. 
1 Thess. 4. 7. 1 Pet. 1. 15, 16. q Exod. 6. 7. 

would make themselves abominable if 
they ate them, and unclean if they did 
but tovxh them. 

44. For 1 am the Lord your God, Sf-c. 
See Note on Ex. 3. 15, 18. We have 
here the spiritual drift of all these car- 
nal and ceremonial ordinances ; for 
^ meat commendeth us not to God,' nor 
is ' any thing unclean of itself,' nor is 
there ' any thing from without a man 
which entering in can defde him.' A 
grand moral purport was couched under 
all these legal rites, and from the de- 
claration in these verses we cannot fail 
to discern what it is. As God himself 
is a being of infinite purity and perfec- 
tion, unutterably surpassing all the false 
gods of the heathen, so it was his pur- 
pose that his own covenant people should 
be signally separated and distinguished 
in their mode of life from all the sur- 
rounding nations, and thus by being de- 
barred from intercourse with them, be 
secured also from participation in their 
corruptions and idolatries. ^ Nei- 
ther shall ye defile yourselves. Heb. 
tDiD'^lTilIJi^!] naphshoth'ckem,your souls; 
as in the preceding verse. On the pe- 
culiar use of this term in Hebrew, see 
Note on Gen. 34. 29. In this connexion it 
evidently has relation rather to the body 
than the mind, as is often the case else- 
where. 

45. I am the Lord that hringcth you 
up out of the land of Egypt, ^c. This 
was an act of favor signal and illustri- 
ous, and lying so essentially at the 
foundation of all other mercies towards 



to be your God : rye shall there- 
fore be holy, for I am holy. 

46 This IS the law of the beasts, 
and of the fowl, and of every living 
creature thatmoveth in the waters, 
and of every creature that creepeth 
upon the earth : 

47 s To make a difference between 
the unclean and the clean, and be- 
tween the beast that may be eaten 
and the beast that may not be eaten. 

r ver. 44. s ch. 10. 10. 



them as a nation, that it is again and 
again appealed to with a view to im- 
press a sense of their obligations on 
their hearts. There could not be a 
greater aggravation of their guilt than 
to be unmindful of what God had 
wrought for them in their deliverance 
by a stretched-out arm from the house 
of bondage. 

46. This is the law of beasts, 4-c. 
That is, this collection of laws in the 
present chapter constitutes that code 
which is to regulate the distinction of 
living creatures into clean and unclean, 
and thereby to afford you a rule by 
which to distinguish between the dif- 
ferent kinds of meat which may and 
which may not be eaten. 

47. To make a difference between the 
unclean and the clean. Heb. ^^I^inj) 
lehavdil, to separate, to divide. It is 
the same word which occurs v. 10 of 
the preceding chapter, where the priests 
are commanded to be always sober, that 
they may be able ^ to put a difference 
(i^^^np lehavdil) between holy and 
unholy, between unclean and clean,* 
which they were to do not only for 
themselves, but also for others, for ' the 
priest's lips should keep knowledge.' 
Accordingly it is said, Ezek. 44. 23, 
^ And they shall teach my people the 
difference between the holy and profane, 
and cause them to discern between the 
unclean and the clean.^ And so also 
Jer. 15. 19, ' Therefore thus saith the 
Lord, If thou return, then will I bring 
thee again, and thou shalt stand before 



1 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XII. 



113 



me : and if thou take forth the precious 
from the vile, thou shall be as my 
mouth : let them return unto thee ; but 
return not thou unto them.' Whereas 
the opposite is expressively set forth, 
Ezek. 22. 26, ' Her priests have violated 
my law, and have profaned mine holy 
things : they have put no difference be- 
tween the holy and profane^ neither 
have they showed difference between the 
unclean and the clean, and have hid 
their ej^es from my sabbaths, and I am 
profaned among them.' 

General Results. — On a retrospect 
of this chapter, it will be seen that the 
legal restrictions imposed upon the 
Hebrews by the laws of Moses, as to 
animal food, were, in their general re- 
sults, as follows : — 

With the exception of locusts, the 
whole of the invertebrate classes are 
prohibited. 

Of the vertebrate animals, the whole 
of the order of reptiles are prohibited. 

Of the orders mammalia and pisces, 
i. e. quadrupeds and fishes, a classifica- 
tion is made, restricting the clean quad- 
rupeds to such as parted the hoof, and 
were cloven-footed, and chewed the 
cud J and the clean fishes, to such as 
had fins and scales. These definitions 
are so precise and comprehensive, that 
there could not be much difliculty in 
determining what was excluded by 
them. They permitted the eating only 
a few of the graminivorous quadrupeds, 
such as oxen, sheep, and deer ; and 
such fishes (whether from salt or fresh 
water) as had the clear and obvious 
character of fins and scales ; most, if 
not all, of which afford a palatable and 
nutritious diet. 

To prevent the possibility, however, 
of mistake, a few of the prohibited 
quadrupeds are specified; viz. the camel, 
the jerboa, (a common animal in the 
East) the hare, the mole, the mouse, 
and the bat ; the ape and monkey tribe 
are excluded, by the apt definition of 
animals going upon their paws or fingers. 
10* 



With respect to birds, it is singular 
that no general definition is given of 
the clean or unclean ; but certain spe- 
cies or genera are enumerated and de- 
clared unclean, leaving it to be inferred 
that all the rest might be eaten. 

According to the viev/ taken above, 
all vultures, eagles, falcons, hawks, 
crows, ostriches, sea-gulls, owls, peli- 
cans, ibises, storks, herons, and hoopoes 
were declared unclean. Linnaeus di- 
vided the aves (birds) into 78 genera : 
not more than eleven of these are pro- 
hibited by the laws of Moses. The 67 
remaining genera include among them 
the whole of the anseres, or goose and 
duck tribe ; the whole of the gallince, or 
grain-eating tribe, as peacocks, pheas- 
ants, partridges, quails, and commoa 
fowls. The whole of the passeres, in- 
cluding doves, pigeons, and numerous 
genera of small fruit and seed-eating 
birds. These, and various other genera 
of birds, seem to have been deemed 
clean ; from whence, perhaps, it may 
be inferred, that the flesh of birds was 
considered in that early age peculiarly 
wholesome and nutritious food. It is 
well known also, that geese, ducks, 
quails, pigeons, and birds of that kind, 
abound in Egypt and Palestine. 



CHAPTER XII. 

Laws relative to the Purification of 
Women after Child-birth. 
The ordinances contained in this 
chapter having, like most of the code to 
which they belong, been abolished under 
the gospel, can have little practical re- 
lation to us ; yet the perusal of them 
cannot but be interesting to the Christian 
reader from their connexion with some 
of the incidents of the gospel history. 
We learn from one of the evangelists, 
that when the mother of our Lord went 
up to the Temple with her offering in 
obedience to this law, she was not able 
to offer a lamb, but was obliged to ac- 
cept the alternative allowed to the poor, 
of offering two turtle doves, or two 



114 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



CHAPTER XII. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2 Speak unto the children of Is- 
rael, saying, If a a woman have 
conceived seed, and borne a man- 
child, then b she shall be unclean 
seven days : c according to the days 
of the separation for her infirmity 
shall she be unclean. 

^ ch. 15. 19. b Luke 2. 22. c ch. 15. 19. 



young pigeons. Thus an interesting 
"evidence is furnished of the low circuni- 
ylances of the family into which the 
Savior was born. While the Israelites 
remained in the wilderness, it is proba- 
ble that the women brought their offer- 
ings immediately after the period of 
their separation had expired. But when 
they were settled in Palestine, and 
many families lived at a distance from 
the Temple, it may be presumed that 
they were allowed to consult their con- 
venience on this point. It is at least 
certain that after the birth of Samuel, 
1 Sam. 1. 21, his mother Hannah did 
not go to the tabernacle until the child 
was weaned. 

1. The Lord spake unto Moses, say- 
ing, &c. The directions in this chapter 
are given to Moses alone, whereas those 
in the preceding were delivered to him 
and Aaron conjointly, as are those 
which follow, ch. 13, respecting the 
Leprosy. The reason of this was, that 
it peculiarly devolved upon Aaron and 
his sons to discriminate in this matter 
between the clean and unclean 5 and as 
it was a matter attended with some 
difficulty, they are especially charged 
by God in respect to it. But as the 
legal purification of a woman was a 
ceremony of very obvious import and 
easy execution, it was sufficient that 
they received their instructions respect- 
ing it from Moses. 

2. If a woman have conceived seed 
and borne a man-child. Heb. S^'i^tlD 
tazria, hath seeded, or yielded seed, 
equivalent to conception, as it is ren- 



3 And in the ^ eighth day the flesh 
of his foreskin shall be circumcised. 

4 And she shall then continue in 
the blood of her purifying three and 
thirty days : she shall touch no 
hallowed thing, nor come into the 
sanctuary, until the days of her 
purifying be fulfilled. 



d Gen.' 17. 12. Luke 1. 59, and 2. 21. 
John 7. 22, 23. 



dered in the Chal. and other versions, 
though the usual word to express this 
idea is tlin ^hardh, and not ^"^it zCira. 
The prescribed period of uncleanness 
on the birth of a male child was to be 
seven days, on that of a female fourteen. 
The reason of the distinction is not ob- 
vious. Perhaps the most probable sug- 
gestion is, that it was intended to con- 
ciliate greater respect toward the mo- 
ther of a male child, having reference 
to that studied recognition of the supe- 
riority of this sex which pervades the 

Mosaic institutions. IT According to 

the days of the separation for her in- 
firmity. Heb. niTin t\1^ ^l^^'D kime 
niddath devothah, according to the days 
of the separation of her sickness. On 
this point the reader may consult ch. 
15. 19—25. Throughout this first period 
of her legal uncleanness she neither 
partook of any thing that was holy, nor 
enjoyed intercourse with any person. 
Even her husband did not eat or drink 
with her, and those who attended upon 
her became thereby unclean. After 
seven days the rigor of this separation 
was relaxed, as we shall see below. 
As to the rite of circumcision which 
was to follow on the eighth day, see 
Note on Gen. 17. 12. 

4. She shall then continue. Heb. 
'21Dt\ tesheb, shall sit ; a common term 
to express abiding or continuing in a 
particular place or state. This ^ con- 
tinuance' in the blood of her purifying 
was to be reckoned from the end of the 
seven days above-mentioned, so that 
the whole time amounted to forty days. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIII. 



115 



5 But if she bear a maid-child, 
then she shall be unclean two 
weeks, as in her separation : and 
she shall continue in the blood of 
her purifying three-score and six 
days. 

6 And e when the days of her pu- 
rifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for 
a daughter, she shall bring a lamb 
of the first year for a burnt-offering, 
and a young pigeon, or a turtle- 
dove, for a sin-offering, unto the 
door of the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation, unto the priest : 

e Luke -2. 22. 

During this latter portion of the time, 
though she was by no means doomed to 
an utter separation from all society, 
yet she was to be debarred from the 
sanctuary, and from all participation 
in the sacrifices of the Passover and the 
Peace-offerings, of which she would 
otherwise be permitted to eat. 

o. But if she have a maid-child. In 
the case of the birth of a daughter, the 
time of strict separation was just dou- 
ble that prescribed at the birth of a 
son, and so also was the time of their 
subsequent purification, it being sixty- 
six days before she was admitted to the 
sanctuary. During this time she was 
said to ' continue in the blood of her 
purifying,' by which it is not to be un- 
derstood that there was any thing phy- 
sically impure in the state of the blood 
at this time. On the contrary, the 
blood is perfectly pure as to its quality^ 
though somewhat excessive in quantity^ 
for reasons well known to physiologists. 
The purification enjoined was v/holly 
of a ceremonial^ and not at all of a 
physical J kind. 

6. And when the days of her purifica- 
tion are fulfilled^ &c. We have here 
the divine ordinance as to the manner 
in which the close of this period of 
purification should be celebrated. On 
the forty-first day from the birth of the 
child, if a male, or the eighty-first, if a 
female, the mother was to appear at the 



7 Who shall offer it before the 
Lord, and make an atonement for 
her ; and she shall be cleansed from 
the issue of her blood. This is the 
law for her that hath borne a male 
or a female. 

8 f And if she be not able to bring 
a lamb, then she shall bring two 
turtles, or two young pigeons ; the 
one for the burnt-offering, and the 
other for a sin-offering: sand the 
priest shall make an atonement 
for her, and she shall be clean. 

i ch. 5. 7. Luke 2. 24. § ch. 4. 26. 



tabernacle, v/ith the present of a two- 
fold offering, by way of testim.ony to 
her grateful sense of the mercies vouch- 
safed to her ;— the one a burnt- offering 
of a lamb of the first year, and the 
other a sin-offering of a young pigeon 
or a turtle-dove. We notice, hov/ever, 
in the connexion a kindly provision in 
behalf of those who were not able, 
from extreme poverty^ to bring a lamb 
on this occasion. They might com- 
mute the offering by doubling the obla- 
tion of birds ; and this we learn from 
the Evangelist, Luke 2. 24, was done 
by the mother of our Lord. What a 
striking view does this afford us of the 
circumstances in which He was ushered 
into life, who was not only heir to the 
throne of David, but appointed also to 
be ^ Lord of lords and King of kings i' 



CHAPTER XIIL 
Among the various diseases to which 
the Israelites were subject, none was so 
odious, so formidable, so incurable as 
the Leprosy, v/hich forms the subject 
of the present chapter. Although this 
disease was not peculiar to the Jews, 
as it prevailed in Egypt, Syria, and the 
northern part of upper Asia, yet it was 
regarded by the chosen people as pro- 
ceeding immediately from the hand of 
God, and was always considered as a 
punishment for sin. Accordingly it 
was usually denominated by them S^^-'H 



116 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490- 



CHAPTER XIII. 

AND the LoKD spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2 When a' man shall have in the 
skin of his flesh a rising, a a scab, 

a Dcut. 28. 27. Isai. 3. 17. 

hannega, InS^llZ ^^2 nega tzdraath, the 
stroke or loound, i. e. by supplying the 
ellipsis, the stroke or wound of the 
Lord. The disease, though not unknown 
in modem times, is yet comparatively 
rare, especially in European countries, 
and in our own, is scarcely known at all. 
Its leading characteristic, as outwardly 
visible, is a spotted skin. These spots 
in the outset are commonly small, re- 
sembling the pustules made by the 
prick of a pin, but they gradually in- 
crease in size, and often for a number 
of years, till they become as large as a 
coffee-bean, covering the whole body, 
and finally terminating in ulcers, which 
penetrate inwardly till they have pro- 
duced a complete caries of the bones, 
and the whole body becomes little 
better than a mass of corruption. But 
spots upon the body resembling these 
were not always the effect of leprosy ; 
it therefore became important to lay 
down rules for distinguishing between 
leprous spots and those which are harm- 
less, and result from other causes. 
This is the object of the present chap- 
ter ; and no part of the Levitical code 
will appear more worthy of its divine 
author than this, when we consider that 
it was designed, not wantonly to fix the 
charge of being a leper upon an inno- 
cent person, and thus to impose upon 
him a load of grievous restraints and 
inconveniences, but to ascertain in the 
fairest and most satisfactory manner 
the real subjects of the scourge, and to 
separate them from all intercourse 
with their fellow-men. As this was the 
prominent aim of the laws on this sub- 
ject, viz. to secure a fair and impartial 
decision of the main question, of the 
fact of the disease, Moses has not men- 
tioned those signs of leprosy which ad- 



or bright spot, and it be in the 
skin of his flesh, like the plague of 
leprosy ; ^ then he shall be brought 
unto Aaron the priest, or unto one 
of his sons the priests: 

b Deut. 17. 8, 9, and 24. 8. Luke 17. 14. 

mitted of no doubt, but those only 
which might be the subject of conten- 
tion, and left it to the priests to distin- 
guish between the really leprous, and 
those who had only the appearance of 
being such. 

Rules for distinguishing the Leprosy. 
2. When a man shall have in the skin 
of his flesh a rising, a scab, or bright 
spot, and it be in the skin of his flesh 
like the plague of leprosy. Heb. (T^m 
riSJ^lZ >'3ji vehdydh lenega tzdrdathj 
and it become to a stroke of leprosy. 
That is, so as to assume the appearance 
and excite the suspicion of leprosy. 
The term ^ leprosy,' is derived from the 
Gr. XcTTjoa, lepra, from Xm?, a scale, be- 
cause in this disease the body was often 
covered with thin white scales, so as to 
give it the appearance of snow. Thus 
it is said of the hand of Moses, Ex. 4. 6, 
that it was ^ leprous as snow ;' and of 
Miriam, Num. 12. 10, that ' she became 
leprous, white as snow ;^ so also of 
Gehazi, 2 Kings, 5. 27, that ^ he went 
from his (Elisha's) presence, a leper 
as white as snow.'' This peculiarity of 
the disease is thus accounted for in the 
' Medica Sacra' of Mead. ' The seeds 
of leprous contagion are mixed with an 
acrid and salt humor, derived from the 
blood, which, as it naturally ought part- 
ly to have turned into nutriment, and 
partly to have perspired through the 
skin, it now lodges and corrodes the 
little scales of the cuticle, and these 
becoming dry and white, sometimes 
even as white as snow, are separated 
from the skin, and fall off like bran.» 
The Heb. term is D!S>^^ tzdraah, from 
a root signifying to strike, or smite as 
with some venomous or infectious mat- 
ter. Hence, the true import of the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIII. 



117 



3 And the priest shall look on the 
plague m the skin of the flesh : and 
when the hair in the plague is 
turned white, and the plague in 
sight be deeper than the skin of 
his flesh, it is a plague of leprosy: 

original is a fretting soreness^ or a 
piercing infectious scahbinessj denomi- 
nated also in the scriptures, ' the 
plague,' i. e. the ' stroke,' or the 
^ wound' of leprosy, as the Jews regarded 
it as a disease sent directly from God 
as a punishment of sin, Moses having 
prescribed no natural rem.edy for the 
cure of it. In the Chal. it is termed 
Til'I'^^O segiruthj shutting up, because 
it caused men to be secluded from so- 
ciety. This dreadful disease which 
prevails in Egypt and Syria, generally 
manifests itself at first, in the manner 
described in the text. Its commence- 
ment is scarcely perceptible j there 
appearing only a few reddish spots on 
the skin which are not attended with 
pain or any other symptom., but which 
cannot be removed. It increases im- 
perceptibly, and continues for some 
years to be more and more manifest. 
The spots become larger, spreading 
over the skin, till at length they cover 
the whole body with a leprous scurf. 
The disease affects at the same time 
the marrow and the bones ; so much so, 
that the farthest joints in the sj^stem 
gradually lose their powers, and the 
members fall together in such a man- 
ner, as to give the body a miUtilated and 
dreadful appearance. In its final stages, 
the w^hole mass of the patient's flesh 
and blood seem.s to turn to corruption, 
and he may be said almost literally to 
fall to pieces. This disease, though 
very infrequent in Europe, indeed, al- 
most extinct, made its appearance about 
the year 1730 in the w^estern continent, 
and spread its ravages in the sugar 
islands of the West Indies, particularly 
Guadaloupe. M. Peysonael, who was 
sent to that island in order to acquaint 
himself with the natiure of the disease, 



and the priest shall look on him, 
and pronounce him unclean. 
4 If the bright spot be white in 
the skin of his flesh, and in sight 
be not deeper than the skin, and 
the hair thereof be not turned 



observes, after giving the symptoms 
as above mentioned, that ^ as the disease 
advances, the upper part of the nose 
swells, the nostrils become enlarged, 
and the nose itself soft. Tumors ap- 
pear on the jaws ; the eyebrows swell ; 
the ears become thick ; the points of 
the fingers, as also the feet and toes, 
swell ; the nails become scaly j the 
joints of the hands and feet separate 
and drop off. On the palms of the 
hands, and on the soles of the feet, ap- 
pear deep dry ulcers, which increase 
rapidly and then disappear again. In 
short, in the last stage of the disease 
the patient becomes a hideous spectacle, 
and falls in pieces. These symptoms 
supervene by very slow and successive 
steps, requiring often many years be- 
fore they all occur. The patient ^uflfers 
no violent pain, but feels a sort of numb- 
ness in his hands and feet. During the 
whole period of the disorder, those 
afflicted with it experience no obstruc- 
tion in what are called the Naturalia. 
They eat and drink as usual ; and even 
when their fingers and toes mortify, the 
loss of the mortified parts is the only 
consequence that ensues ; for the wound 
heals of itself without any medical 
treatment or application. When, how^- 
ever, the unfortunate wretches come to 
the last period of the disease, they are 
hideously disfigured, and objects of the 
greatest compassion.' 

3, 4. Pronounce him unclean. Heb. 
Itlii^ &^)2tl timm'd otho, shall make him 
unclean, or shall pollute him y a phrase- 
ology of not unfrequent occurrence, by 
which one is said to do that which he 
merely, in a ministerial capacity, pro- 
nounces, predicts, or declares to be done. 
Thus Ezek. 43. 3, is said to ' destroy 
the city,' when he simply pronounced 



118 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



white ; then the priest shall shut 
up him that Jiath the plague seven 
days : 

5 And the priest shall look on 
him the seventh day: and behold, 
if the plague in his sight be at a 
stay, and the plague spread not in 
the skin ; then the priest shall shut 
him up seven days more : 

6 And the priest shall look on 
him a^ain the seventh day : and 



or prophecied its destruction. In like 
manner the apostles, as ministers of 
Christ, are said to have been empowered 
to hind and to loose^ to remit men's 
sins, and to retain them, when all that 
is intended is, that they were simply to 
declare them to be so bound or loosed, 
remitted or retained, according to the 
tenor of God's word. It is to be observ- 



ed, that there are three 



of a 



leprosy stated in the first verse ; (1) a 
tumor or swelling j (2) a scab j (3) a 
bright spot. Of these indications, the 
sacred writer begins with the last, viz. 
the bright spot, in which, if the hair 
were turned white, and it was not a 
superficial whiteness merely, but the 
spot seemed to have eaten deeper, even 
into the very flesh, then it was beyond 
doubt that it was a true leprosy. But 
if upon inspection there merely appear- 
ed a white spot in the skin, which had 
not afiected the color of the hair, then 
it could not be positively determined 
that the disease was leprosy. But it 
had some of the symptoms of leprosy, 
and might prove to be such j at any 
rate appearances were so far against the 
person that it was proper he should be 
separated from others long enough to 
afford time for an accurate judgment of 
the nature of the affection. The priest 
therefore was to shut him up for seven 
days, during which time it would be apt 

to develope its true character. 

IT Shall shut up him that hath the plague. 
The words 'him that hath,' it will be 
noticed, are not found in the text, of 



behold, if the plague be somewhat 
dark, and the plague spread not in 
the skin, the priest shall pronounce 
him clean : it is but a scab : and 
he c shall wash his clothes, and be 
clean. 

7 But if the scab spread much 
abroad in the skin, after that he 
hath been seen of the priest for his 
cleansing, he shall be seen of the 
priest again : 

c ch. 1. 25, and 14. 8. 

which the true rendering is, ' Shall shut 
up the plague.' Gr. afopiei tyiv diprjVj 
shall separate the plague. This is a 
usage of the sacred writers, by which 
the abstract is put for the concrete, 
often met with, as ' captivity' for ' cap- 
tives,' Ps. 68. 19 ; ' the hoary head ' for 
'hoary headed person,' Lev. 19. 32 j 
' rebellion ' for ' the rebellious,' Ezek. 
44. 6 ; 'a charge ' for ' those having 
charge,' Ezek. 44. 11 ; ' pride ' for 
' proud man/ Jer. 50. 31 j ' circumcision ' 
for ' those circumcised,' Rom. 2. 26. 

5. If the plague in his sight be at a 
stay. Heb. ^J2^ ^^'2 nega dmad, the 
plague stand. If the priest, at the 
week's end, saw no alteration in the . 
symptoms, as the case remained dubi- 
ous, he was to prolong the period of \ 
separation another seven days, and if at 
the end of that time the appearance of 
the affected part continued the same, 
except that the white spot began to as- 
sume a somewhat darkish hue, then he 
was to pronounce him clean, i.e. free 
from the plague of leprosy. Still as 
the very cause that had led to his being 
suspected showed that there was some 
degree of impurity in his blood, a slight 
purification was prescribed, the moral 
effect of which would naturally be to 
teach that the very appearance of evil 
is an adequate ground of humiliation to 
any one that fears God. 

7. If the scab spread much. The real 
leprosy might after all lurk in the sys- 
tem, notwithstanding the rigid exami- 
nation and the probationary seclusion 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER Xlit 



119 



8 And if the priest see that be- 
hold, the scab spreadeth in the 
skin, then the priest shall pro- 
nounce him unclean : it is a leprosy. 

9 H When the plague of leprosy 
is in a man, then he shall be 
brought unto the priest : 

10 d And the priest shall see him : 
and behold, tf the rising be white 
in the skin, and it have turned the 
hair white, and there be quick raw 
flesh in the rising: 

11 It is an old leprosy in the skin 

<i Numb. 12. 10, 12. 2 Kings 5. 27. 2 Chron. 
26. 20. 

to which the person had been subjected. 
If the scab spread subsequently in the 
skin, the symptom was decisive, and 
the priest was to give his verdict of 
^ unclean.' accordingly ; and Maimoni- 
des tells us, that if any one were so 
profane as to neglect his case under 
these circumstances, and to forbear 
going to the priest for his judgment, 
the penalty v/as, to have his leprosy 
cleave to him through life. 

10. If the rising be white in the skin, 
&c. These symptoms were peculiar to 
the first form of leprosy mentionedj 
V. 2, viz. that of the tumor or swelling. 
If in addition to the whiteness on the 
skin, and the hair turning white, there 
was also the presence of quick rav/ 
flesh in the swelling, it was an indubita- 
ble sign of an old or inveterate leprosy, 
v/hich had been long seated in the sys- 
tem, and the priest was at once to pro- 
nounce him unclean, v/ithout the cere- 
mony of a previous shutting up, which 
v^^as ordered in doubtful cases only. 
Here the case was too plain to admit 
of doubt. 

Distinction of Leprosy from a Cuta- 
neous Eruption very much resem- 
bling it. 

12, 13. If a leprosy break out abroad, 
&c. The precept in this case appears 
singular. Why should the partial leper 
be pronounced unclean, while the per- 



of his flesh, and the priest shall 
pronounce him unclean, and shall 
not shut him up : for he is unclean. 

12 And if a leprosy break out 
abroad in the skin, and the leprosy 
cover all the skin of hitji thai hath 
the plague from his head even to 
his foot, wheresoever the priest 
looketh ; 

13 Then the priest shall consider : 
and behold, if the leprosy have 
covered all his flesh, he shall pro- 
nounce him clean that hath the 
plague ; it is all turned white : he 
IS clean. 

son totally covered with the disease 
was to be pronounced clean ? The true 
answer perhaps is, that it was owing to 
a different species or a different stage 
of the disease ; the partial being infec- 
tious, the total not. The fact moreover 
that the disease was driven out to the 
surface argued a sound and healthy 
state of the system in general. Yet it 
is but proper to remark, that Patrick 
takes entirely a different view of the 
drift of this passage. He supposes that 
that which is here called ' leprosy' was 
not truly such, but another disease hav- 
ing so strong a resemblance to the lep- 
rosy, as to prompt the writer to give it 
the same denomination. But the differ- 
ence lay in the fact, that in this quasi- 
leprosy the skin was entirely covered 
by one continuous scurf, whereas in the 
true leprosy, the spots or scabs did not 
run together in the manner here inti- 
mated, but gave a sort of scaly 
appearance to the body. This univer- 
sal eruption from head to foot, however 
loathsome to the eye, might still be 
harmless in itself, and perhaps a relief 
to the morbid internal condition of the 
body, as in the case of measles and 
small-pox. The man, therefore, under 
these circumstances was to be pronounc- 
ed clean. IT Shall pronounce him 

clean that hath the plague. Heb. ^ntO 
5>55n riJj^ tdhar eth hanndga, shall clean 
the plague ; i. e. shall pronounce clean 



120 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



14 But when raw flesh appearelh 
ill him, he shall be unclean. 

15 And the priest shall see the 
raw flesh, and pronounce him to 
be unclean : for the raw flesh is 
unclean : it is a leprosy. 

16 Or if the raw flesh turn again, 
and be changed into white, he shall 
come unto the priest ; 

] 7 And the priest shall see him : 
and behold, if the plague be turned 
into white ; then the priest shall 
pronounce him clean that hath the 
plague : he is clean. 

18 IF The flesh also, in which, 
even m the skin thereof, was a 
e boil, and is healed, 

19 And in the place of the bile 
there be a white rising, or a bright 
spot, white, and somewhat reddish, 
and it be showed to the priest ; 

e Exod. 9. 9. 

him that hath the plague, as rightly 
rendered in the English translation. See 
above the Note on v. 3. 

14-17. But when rawjiesh appeai'eth 
in him, &c. That is, sound flesh, Gr. 
Xpoi5 ^o)v, living flesh. If patches of 
sound or natural flesh appeared inter- 
mmgled with the white scurf or scales, 
the presumption was, that the genuine 
leprosy was upon him, which was to 
be thus distinguished from that cuta- 
neous eruption mentioned above. Still 
even this sign might be fallacious, as 
the sound parts of the skin, or the ' raw 
flesh,' might ere long become white like 
the rest, and then the proof would be 
decisive that it was not leprosy, and 
the priest was to pronounce him clean. 

Distinction of Leprosy , when occasion- 
ed by a former Sore or Ulcer. 
18-23. The flesh also in which, even 
in the skin thereof, was a boil, &c. 
Chal. ' The man also in whose skin,' 
&c. In this and the following verses, 
the writer treats of those cases of lep- 
rosy that rose from old ulcers that had 
once been healed. Such cicatrized 



20 And if, when the priest seeth 
it, behold, it be in sight lower than 
the skin, and the hair thereof be 
turned white ; the priest shall pro- 
nounce him unclean : it is a plague 
of leprosy broken out of the bile. 

21 But if the priest look on it, and 
behold, there be no white hairs 
therein, and ifh be not lower than 
the skin, but be somewhat dark ; 
then the priest shall shut him up 
seven days: 

22 And if it spread much abroad 
in the skin, then the priest shall 
pronounce him unclean : it is a 
plague. 

23 But if the bright spot stay in 
his place, a7id spread not, it is a 
burning boil ; and the priest shall 
pronounce him clean. 

24 % Or if there be any flesh, in 
the skin, whereof the7'e is a hot 



sores might break out afresh and prove 
a real leprosy. A person with any 
sore or disposition to contagion, was 
more likely to catch the infection from 
contact with the diseased person, than 
he was whose skin was whole and 
sound, and his habits good. The requi- 
site rules of discrimination in such 

cases, are here given. ^ In the place 

of the boil. In the place where the boil 
formerly broke out, but seemed after- 
wards to be healed. The original word 
for 'boil 'is '^'^hTD she'hin, the expla- 
nation of which see in the Note on Ex. 
9.9. 

Distinction of Leprosy, when occasion' 
cd by a former Burning. 
24-28. In the skin whereof there is 
a hot burning. Heb. IDi^ ^n^J2 mikvath 
esh, burning of fire. The case alluded 
to is probably one where a burning coal, 
or hot iron, or something of that nature 
had fallen upon the flesh and caused an 
inflammation that might easily give 
rise to leprosy if a predisposition to it 
already existed. Horsley, however, 
supposes the ' hot burning' was an 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIII. 



121 



burning, and the quicli flesh that 
burneth have a white bright spot, 
somewhat reddish, or white ; 

25 Then the priest shall look 
upon it : and behold, if the hair in 
the bright spot be turned white, 
and it be in sight deeper than the 
skin ; it is a leprosy broken out of 
the burning: wherefore the priest 
shall pronounce him unclean : it 
is the plague of leprosy. 

26 But if the priest look on it, and 
behold, there he no white hair in 
the bright spot, and it be no lower 
than the other skin, but be some- 
what dark ; then the priest shall 
shut him up seven days : 

27 And the priest shall look upon 
him the seventh day: and it it be 
spread much abroad in the skin, 
then the priest shall pronounce 
him unclean : it is the plague of 
leprosy. 

28 And if the bright spot stay in 
his place, and spread not in the 
skin, but it be somewhat dark ; it 
is a rising oi^ the burning, and the 
priest shall pronounce him clean : 
for it is an inflammation of the 
burning. 

29 IT If a man or woman have a 
plague upon the head or the beard ; 

30 Then the priest shall see the 
plague : and behold, if it he in sight 
deeper than the skin, and there he 
in it a yellow thin hair; then the 
priest shall pronounce him unclean : 
it IS a dry scall, even a leprosy 
upon the head or beard. 

erysipelas or St. Anthony^ 8 fire. What 
ever it were, the case was to be deter- 
mined by the rules here given. 

Distinction of Leprosy from Dry-scall. 
29-37. It is a dry-scall. Heb. pr^5 
nithek. Gr. Qpavcrua e(ttLj it is a broken 
sore. The original comes from the 
root ptij ndthak, to plucky tear, or draic 
off. and is the name of a disease pecu- 
bar to the head or beard, so called from. 
the hairs being drawn off from the plo.ce 
11 



31 And if the priest look on the 
plague of the scall, and behold, it 
be not in sight deeper than the skin, 
and that there is no black hair in 
it; then the priest shall shut up 
him that hath the plague of the 
scall seven days : 

32 And in the seventh day the 
priest shall look on the plague : 
and behold, if the scall spread not, 
and there be in it no yellow hair, 
and the scall be not in sight deeper 
than the skin ; 

33 He shall be shaven, but the 
scall shall he not shave; and the 
priest shall shut up Mm that hath 
the scall seven days more : 

34 And in the seventh day the 
priest shall look on the scall : and 
behold, if the scall be not spread 
in the skin, nor be in sight deeper 
than the skin ; then the priest shall 
pronounce him clean : and he shall 
wash his clothes, and be clean. 

35 But if the scall spread much 
in the skin after his cleansing ; 

36 Then the priest shall look on 
him: and behold, if the scall be 
spread in ihe skin, the priest shall 
not seek for yellow hair ; he is 
unclean. 

37 But if the scall be in his sight 
at a stay, and that there is black 
hair grown up therein ; the scall 
is healed, he is clean : and the 
priest shall pronounce him clean. 

38 1[ If a man also or a woman 
have in the skin of their flesh bright 
spots, even bright white spots ; 

where it broke out, and leaving a mor- 
bid baldness in its stead. The Hebrews 
describe it thus : ' The plague of the 
head or beard, is when the hair that is 
on them falleth off by the roots, and 
the place of the hair remaineth bare ; and 
this is that which is called ' nethek.^ ' 

Distinction of Leprosy from the ' Bo- 
hak ' or Freckled Spot. 
38. If a man also or a woman. The 
species of leprosy here defined is dis- 



122 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



39 Then the priest shall look: 
and behold, if the bright spots in 
the skin of their flesh he darkish 
white; it is a freckled spot that 
groweth in the skin ; he is clean. 

40 And the man whose hair is 
fallen oiF his head, he is bald ; yet 
is he clean. 

41 And he that hath his hair 
fallen off from the part of his head 
toward his face, he is forehead- 
bald ; yet is he clean. 

42 And if there be in the bald 
head, or bald forehead, a white 
reddish sore; it is a leprosy sprung 
up in his bald head, or his bald 
forehead. 

tiuguished from others by the term 
pn!n bohak, from the Syriac ^ bohak,^ to 
be irhite or shining. The word is used 
to denote a cutaneous eruption, of which 
Niebuhr says, ^ I myself saw a case of 
the Bohak leprosy in a Jew at Mocha. 
The spots in this disease are of unequal 
size. Tliey have no shining appear- 
ance ; nor are they perceptibly elevated 
above the skin ; and they do not change 
the color of the hair. Their color is an 
obscure white, or somewhat reddish. 
The rest of the skin of this patient was 
blacker than that of the people of the 
country is in general j but the spots 
were not so white as the skin of an 
European,- v/hen not sun-burnt. The 
spots, in this species of leprosy, do not 
appear on the hands, nor about the 
navel, but on the neck and face ; not, 
however, on that part of the head where 
the hair grows very thick. They gra- 
dually spreadj and continue sometimes 
only about two months; but in some 
cases, indeed, as long as two years, and 
then disappear, by degrees, of them- 
selves. This disorder is neither infec- 
tious nor hereditary, nor does it occa- 
sion any inconvenience.' 

Distinction of Leprosy from Baldness. 

40-44. The man whose hair is fallen 

off his heady &c. ^ Another description 



43 Then the priest shall look up- 
on it : and behold, if the rising of 
the sore he white reddish in his 
bald head, or in his bald forehead, 
as the leprosy appeareth in the 
skin of the flesh ; 

44 He is a leprous man, he is un- 
clean : the priest shall pronounce 
him utterly unclean ; his plague is 
in his head. 

45 And the leper in whom the 
plague 25, his clothes shall be rent, 
and his head bare, and he shall 
fput a covering upon his upper 
lip, and shall cry, g Unclean, un- 
clean. 

i Ezek. 24. 17. 22. Mic. 3. 7. g Lam. 4. 15. 

of persons, for whose exemption from 
the charge and hardships of leprosy 
Moses took care to provide, were those 
whose heads became bald. Among us, 
and indeed in any country where leprosy 
is not extremely prevalent, such persons 
require no such attention ; for nobody 
would think of accounting a man leprous 
because his head happened to become 
prematurely bald, were it even in the 
days of his youth. As, however, the 
falling of the hair is sometimes, and in 
connection with other symptoms, a 
strong criterion of leprosy, and as there 
actually is a particular kind of leprosy, 
which might, perhaps, even then, have 
been observed to have the peculiarity 
of being limited either to the fore or 
hind part of the head, it was not strange 
that a person who became bald, and 
more especially if not very far advanced 
in years, should incur the suspicion of 
being leprous. Now in such cases, we 
find Moses giving an explanation, viz. 
that if no farther symptoms were found 
than mere baldness, the person was not 
to lie under the suspicion of leprosy, but 
to be considered as clean.' — Michaelis. 

Conduct to be observed by Lepers. 

45. The leper in ivhom the plague is, 
his clothes shall be rent. The leprous 
person was required to be as one that 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIII. 



123 



46 All the days wherein the 
plague shall he in him he shall be 
defiled ; he is unclean : he shall 
dwell alone, i^ without the camp 
shall his habitation he. 

47 H The garment also that the 

li Numb. 5. 2, and 12. 14, 2 Kings 7. 3, 
and 15. 5. 2 Chron. 26. 21. Luke 17. 12. 

mourned for the dead, or for some great 
and public calamity. He was to have 
his clothes rent in token of extreme 
sorrow ; his head was to be made bare ; 
the ordinary bonnet or turban being 
omitted J and to have a covering upon 
the upper lip ; or rather, as the original 
word ' upper lip ' is with equal proba- 
bility interpreted of the whole chin, he 
was to have the lower part of his face 
bound around with a bandage, leaving 
the mouth just freedom enough to make 
the declaration, unclean I unclean I 
which uttered from lips thus muffled up, 
must have been sounded forth in a 
peculiarly doleful accent. The reason 
of uttering this cry was to prevent any 
person from coming near him, lest de- 
filement might be incurred by contact. 
Therefore the Chal. renders it, ^ Be ye 
not made unclean ! be ye not made un- 
clean ." and Tar. Jon. ^ Avoid ! avoid 
the unclean i^ In allusion to this it is 
said. Lam. 4. 15, ^ They cried unto 
them, depart ye ; (I am) unclean ; de- 
part, depart, touch not,' In the East 
lepers are not at this day absolutely in- 
terdicted from going abroad, for they 
are not considered as pestilential. 
Niebuhr says, ' I might have seen num- 
bers of them ; but whenever I observed 
any of them meeting me in the streets, 
I deemed it prudent to avoid them.' 

46. He shall dwell alone ; without the 
camp shall his habitation be. Heb. 
Stw'^ Tl!n bcldad yesheb, he shall sit 
alone. Gr. KEX^pLcr[xevog KaOncre-ai^ he 
shall sit separated. This was a salutary 
precaution for the sake of the sound, 
and the temporary seclusion might 
easily be turned to a useful account 
to the leper himself ; for there was 



plague of leprosy is in, whether it 
be a woollen garment, or a linen 
garment ; 

48 Whether it he in the warp, or 
woof, of linen, or of w^oollen: whe- 
ther in a skin, or in any thing 
made of skin : 

49 And if the plague be greenish 

every thing in his condition calculated 
to admonish him of his moral defile- 
ment, and prompt him to seek for an 
effectual cleansing of that inner malady 
which was so strikingly set forth by the 
loathsome leprosy that covered his 
body. The law here enacted seems to 
have been strictly observed. So early 
as the second j^ear of the Exodus, lepers 
were obliged to reside without the camp, 
Numb. 5. 1-4 ; and so strictly was this 
law enforced, that the sister of Moses 
himself becoming leprous, was expelled 
from it. Numb. 12. 14-16. When the 
Israelites came into their own land, 
and lived in cities, the spirit of the law 
thus far operated, that lepers were 
obliged to reside in a separate place, 
which was called Ti'^u&n D'^ln beth 
^hophshithf the house of uncleanness ; 
and from this seclusion, not even kings, 
when they became leprous, were ex- 
empted, 2 Kings 15. 5. 

The Leprosy of Garments. 

47. The garment also that the plague 
of leprosy is in. This leprosy in gar- 
ments appears so strange to us, that it 
has induced some to consider it as an 
extraordinary punishment inflicted by 
God upon the Israelites, as a sign of 
his displeasure against sin , while others 
consider the leprosy in clothes, as also 
in houses, as having no relation to the 
leprosy in man . Indeed, the probability 
is that the term ' leprosy,' in this con- 
nexion, is not intended to be used in the 
same sense in which it is applied to de- 
note a disease affecting the human sys- 
tem, but has rather a figurative import, 
just as ^ cancer ' is used by agricultur- 
ists in reference to a disease of trees, 



124 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



or reddish in the garment, or in 
the skin, either in the warp, or in 
the woof, or in any thing of skin ; 
it is a plague of leprosy, and shall 
be showed unto the priest : 

and as, inversely, the word *rot' is 
applied to a disease of sheep, though 
primitively used of the decomposition 
of timber. The language was no doubt 
intended to intimate that the garment 
was fretted by a process similar to that 
which takes place in the skin in a case 
of real leprosy, occasioned in all likeli- 
hood, by a species of animalcula or ver- 
min, which by breeding in the garments 
must necessarily multiply their kind, 
and/re^ the threads, i. e. corrode a por- 
tion of the finer parts after the manner 
of moths, for their nourishment. It is 
thus that the human skin is affected in 
tlie itch, a disease caused by the psora, 
or itch animal, which is often commu- 
nicated from garments. This plague 
of vestments is termed, v. 51, a ^ fret- 
ting (or rankling) leprosy,' a word 
which is applied in Ezek. 28. 24, to a 
^ pricking ' or ' rankling brier,' and is 
strikingly expressive of the sensation 
produced by the irritating effect of the 
itch in the human subject. We may 
suppose, moreover, that the metaphori- 
cal term ^ leprosy ' was used in this 
connexion on account of the disgusting 
ideas which, by association with the 
human disease, the view of a blemish in 
clothing, called also ' leprosy,' would 
excite in the mind. So much in respect 
to the term. As to the fact indicated 
by it, the inquiries of Michaelis on the 
subject have brought out the following 
results, which are well worth trans- 
cribing in his own words. ' The leprosy 
of clothes is described as consisting of 
green or reddish spots, that remain in 
spite of washing, and still spread ; and 
by which the cloth becomes bald or 
bare, sometimes on the one side, some- 
times on the other. This Moses terms 
dropping or losing the hair ; that is, if 
we are to give the literal truth of the 



50 And the priest shall look upon 
the plague, and shut up it that hath 
the plague seven days : ■ 

51 And he shall look on the ^ 
plague on the seventh day : if the 



Hebrew text, in a passage which might '■ 
have its difficulties to a man of learning, 
if he knew nothing of the manufacture 
of woollen. These symptoms, too, of 
leprosy, are said to be found sometimes 
only in the warpj and at other times 
only in the woof. To a person who has 
nothing to do with the manufactures of 
woollen, linen, or leather, but with 
books only, this must doubtless be ob- 
scure ; or, at most, he will be led to 
think of specks of rottenness, but still 
without being rightly satisfied. I have 
not been able to obtain complete infor- 
mation on this subject ; but in regard to 
wool, and woolen stuffs, I have consult- 
ed the greatest manufacturer in the 
electorate of Hanover ; and he informs 
me, that what he has read in my Ger- 
man Bible, at this passage, will be 
found to hold good, at any rate with 
regard to woollen articles ; and that it 
proceeds from what is called dead wooly 
that is, the wool of sheep that have died 
by disease, not by the knife : that such 
wool, if the disease has been but of 
short duration, is not altogether useless, d 
but in a sheep that has been long dis- " 
eased, becomes extremely bad, and 
loses the points ; and that, according 
to the established usage of honest manu- 
facturers, It is unfair to manufacture 
dead wool into any article worn by 
man ; because vermin are so apt to 
establish themselves in it, particularly 
when it is worn close to the body and 
warmed thereby. When I told him, 
that in the countries, with a view to 
which I questioned him, the people, for 
want of linen and from poverty, had 
always worn, and still v/ear, woollen 
stuffs next the skin, he stated it as his 
opinion that there the disagreeable 
effect just mentioned, must take place 
in a still higher degree than in countries 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIII. 



125 



plague be spread in the garment, 
either in the warp, or in the woof, 
or in a skin, or in any work that 
is made of skin : the plague is i a 
fretting leprosy ; it is unclean. 

52 He shall therefore burn that 
garment, whether warp or woof, 
in woollen or in linen, or any thing 
of skin, wherein the plague is : for 
it is a fretting leprosy; it shall be 
burnt in the fire. 

53 And if the priest shall look, 
and behold, the plague be not 
spread in the garment, either in 
the warp or in the woof, or in any 
thing of skin; 

54 Then the priest shall command 
that they wash the thing wherein 
the plague is, and he shall shut it 
up seven days more : 

55 And the priest shall look on 
the plague after that it is washed : 
and behold, if the plague have not 
changed his colour, and the plague 
be not spread ; it is unclean ; thou 
shalt burn it in the fire; it is fret 

i ch. 14. 44. 

where, according to our German fashion, 
which would there be a luxury, a linen 
shirt is worn between the woollen 
clothes and the body. He added, that 
dead wool was usually manufactured 
into sacks and horse-cloths ; and he 
expressed his wish for a statute, in the 
style of Moses, which should discourage 
the use of dead wool, or inflict a pun- 
ishment on those who either sold it, or 
icnowingly manufactured it into human 
clothing. — I am likewise informed by 
Hamburghers, that in their neighbor- 
hood, many frauds are committed with 
dead wool, from its being sold for good 
wool ; in consequence of which, the 
stuffs made of it not only become very 
soon bare, but full first of little depres- 
sions, and then of holes.' — Comment. 
onL.M, Art. 2U. 

Remarks. — (2.) Nothing that en- 
tered into the Levitical system, which 
11* 



inward, whether it be bare within 
or without. 

56 And if the priest look, and be- 
hold, the plague be somewhat dark 
after the washing of it; then he 
shall send it out of the garment, 
or out of the skin, or out of the 
warp, or out of the woof: 

57 And if it appear still in the 
garment, either in the warp, or in 
the woof, or in any thing of skin ; 
it is a spreading plague : thou 
shalt burn that wherein the plague 
is with fire. 

58 And the garment, either warp, 
or woof, or whatsoever thing of 
skin it be J which thou shalt wash, 
if the plague be departed from 
them, then it shall be washed the 
second time, and shall be clean. 

59 This is the law of the plague 
of leprosy in a garment of woollen 
or linen, either in the warp or 
woof, or any thing of skins, to pro- 
nounce it clean, or to pronounce it 
unclean. 



we are now considering, was more re- 
markably fraught with symbolical im- 
port than the portion concerning the 
treatment of the leper. Other parts of 
the ritual taught impressively the fear- 
ful effects of sin ; this taught its defil- 
ing nature. No conceivable affliction 
or disease could form so striking a re- 
presentation of that moral malady which 
has befallen our nature. We see in the 
leprosy a lively emblem of that universal 
depravity v/hich has corrupted our souls. 
The effects of this deadly spiritual de- 
filement are typically set forth in lively 
colors in the enactments before us. He 
upon whom it appeared was put out of 
the camp or city in which he dwelt, 
and was forced to live alone, cut off 
from all social intercourse. So with 
sin. It does not indeed literally shut 
us out from the society of our fellow- 
creatures, but it renders us odious in 
the sight of God, separates between us 



126 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



A 



CHAPTER XIV. 
ND the Lord spake unto Mo- 



ses, 



and him, precludes us from all cordial 
fellowship with his people, and unless 
we be cleansed from it in the appointed 
way, it will effectually forbid our en- 
trance into his heavenly temple. The 
unpurified and unrenewed sinner is mor- 
ally unclean, and has no spiritual health 
in him ; he is without God and without 
Christ in the world j and from the very 
necessity of his corrupt nature, he is 
excluded from the privileges and bless- 
ings of God's people. When king 
Uzziah was smitten with the leprosy in 
the temple, all the priests with one 
accord rose upon him, and ' thrust him 
out ' of the temple ; yea, he himself 
also ' hasted to go out.' And thus it 
would be in heaven, if by any means an 
unrenewed sinner were admitted there ; 
iie would be ' thrust out,' as unworthy 
of a place in that pure abode; and he 
would no doubt haste to flee out, from 
a consciousness of the same fact. 

(2.) Upon the smallest appearance of 
the leprosy, the subject of it was to 
subject himself to instant examination. 
He must not trust to his ov;n judgment, 
but must apply to those whom God had 
authorized to determine the point, ac- 
cording to the rules prescribed. If this 
could not be done at once, more time 
was taken, till the fact became evident. 
What does this show to us, but that we 
must take ever}^ means of discovering 
the plague-spot of our own hearts ? 
We must not be afraid of knov;ing the 
worst. We must have recourse to the 
word and to the ministers of the word, 
that by their help we may know the 
evil that is in us. Above all, we must 
go to God, who searcheth the heart, 
and trieth the reins, and say, ' Search 
me, God, and know my heart ; try 
me, and know my thoughts.' However 
clear we may be in our own eyes, we 
must say with Paul, ' I judge not mine 
own self ; for I know nothing by myself 



2 This shall be the law of the 
leper in the day of his cleansing : 



(i. e. against myself) ; yet am I not 
hereby justified, but he that justifieth 
me is the Lord.' 

(6.) ^ The priest shall pronounce him 
clean.^ But why not pronounce him 
cured ? The fact is, there was nothing 
prescribed, nor anything to be attempt- 
ed by way of cure for this disease. 
Hence the removal of it is generally 
expressed by the word cleansing. And 
certain it is, in like manner, that none 
but God can deliver us from sin. No 
self-righteous works, no superstitious 
devices, no human efforts, have ever 
been able to expel it out of the soil of 
the depraved heart. The blood of 
Christ alone can avail to this ; and then 
it is not in this life eradicated^ but for- 
given^ just as the Jewish leper is not 
said to have been cured, but cleansed, 
as though the idea of the defilement were 
more prominent in the mind of the law- 
giver than that of the disease, 

(45.) ' Shall cry. Unclean, unclean !' 
Who does not see in this the manner in 
which we are to acknowledge and be- 
wail the corruption of our nature ? 
Who does not recognize the fitting ex- 
pression of a gospel penitent, convinced 
of sin ? Does he not feel the profound- 
est grief and shame ? Does he not ac- 
knowledge himself a miserable and pol- 
luted sinner ? So if we are made truly 
sensible of our own sinful condition, we 
shall rend our hearts, and not our gar- 
ments ; we shall lay our souls bare 
before the heart-searching God ; our 
mouths will be stopped, for we shall 
know ourselves to be guilty ; we shall 
smite each one upon our breast, and cry, 
* God be merciful to me a sinner ." 



CHAPTER XIV. 

The Law of the Purification of the 

Leper. 

2. This shall be the law of the leper, 

&c. That is, this is the mode which 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIV. 



127 



He a shall be brought unto the 
priest : 
3 And the priest shall go forth 
out of the camp : and the priest 

a Matt. 8. 2. 4. Mark 1. 40, 44. Luke 
5. 12, 14, and 17. 14. 

God hath ordained for cleansing a leper, 
or quahfying him to be pronounced 
clean, and thus restored to the commu- 
nion of God's people. IT He shall be 

brought unto the priest. He was to be 
conducted from his * several (separate) 
house,' to the borders of the camp, 
whither the priest was to go forth to 
meet him, and to perform the requisite 
examination. As this coming to the 
priest was required of the leper in every 
instance, however thoroughlj- he might 
have been healed, therefore, our Savior 
said to the leper whom he had healed, 
Matt. 8. 4, * Go show thyself to the 
priest, and offer the gift that Moses 
commanded.' 

4. Then shall the priest command to 
take for him, &c. Heb. npil T^'Dtl m^ 
tzivvdh hakkohen ve-lakah, arid the 
priest shall command^ and he shall take ; 
i. e, the leper shall take. It was pro- 
bably in order to avoid ambiguity as to 
the person, that our translators adopted 
the mode of rendering which appears in 
the text. Of the cedar wood, hyssop, 
clean bird, and scarlet wool, were made 
an instrument to sprinkle with. The 
cedar served for the handle, the hyssop 
and living bird were attached to it, by 
means of the scarlet wool or crimson 
iillet. The bird was so bound to this 
handle, as that its tail should be down- 
wards, in order to be dipt into the blood 
of the bird that had been killed. By 
this means the blood was sprinkled, and 
when this was done, the living bird was 
let loose and permitted to go whither- 
soever it would. The general purport 
of the ceremonies here prescribed, was 
to point out the purification of the soul 
through the atonement and spirit of 
Christ, but it is vain to attempt to fix 
with any positiveness the spiritual im- 



shall look, and behold, z/the plague 
of leprosy be healed in the leper ; 
4 Then shall the priest command 
to take for him that is to be cleansed 
two birds alive and clean, and 



port of each particular rite. Yet it may 
not be amiss to give the explanation of 
R. Abarbanel who imagines that these 
four things had reference by contrast to 
the four evils under which he had la- 
bored, and from which by his cure he 
was delivered. The living bird denoted, 
according to him, that the dead jiesh 
was restored to its Avonted life and 
vigor ; the cedar icood, which is not 
easily corrupted, that the rottenness 
and corruption produced by the leprosy 
was cured, and his flesh become sound 
and healthy ; the scwrlet wool, that his 
blood, by being cleansed of its impuri- 
ties, had again sssumed its jiorid hue, 
and given new freshness and bloom to 
the complexion ; and the hyssop, a 
strongly odoriferous plant, that the ill 
savor and every other species of offen- 
siveness pertaining to the disease, had 

passed away. ^ Two birds alive. 

Heb. t2^^15^ tzipporim, rendered in 
the margin sparrows, as it is also by 
Jerome and many other interpreters. 
But it is evident from an attentive pe- 
rusal of the verse, that it signifies birds 
in general ; for if the sparrow was a 
clean bird, there could be no use in 
commanding a clean one to be taken, 
since every one of the species was cere- 
monially clean ; but if it was unclean 
by law, then it could not be called clean. 
The term here must therefore signify 
birds in general, of which some were 
ceremonially clean, and some unclean ; 
which rendered the specification in the 
command proper and necessary. From 



the terms of the law it a,ppears, that 
any species of clean birds might be taken 
on such occasions, dom.estic or wild ; 
provided only they v/ere clean, and the 
use of them conceded by the laws of 
Moses to the people. Accordingly the 



128 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



b cedar-wood, and c scarlet, and 
<J hyssop. 

5 And the priest shall command 
that one of the birds be killed in 
an earthen vessel, over running 
water. 

6 As for the living bird, he shall 
take it, and the cedar-wood, and 
the scarlet, and the hyssop, and 
shall dip them, and the living bird, 
in the blood of the bird that was 
killed over the running water. 

7 And he shall e sprinkle upon 
him that is to be cleansed from 
the leprosy ^ seven times, and shall 
pronounce him clean, and shall 
let the living bird loose into the 
open field. 

8 And he that is to be cleansed 
g shall wash his clothes, and shave 
off all his hair, ^ and wash himself 
in water, that he may be clean : 

b Numb. 19. G. c pieb. 9. 19. d Ps. 51. 7. 
e Heb. 9. 13. f 2 Kings 6, 10, 14. g ch. 13. 6. 
hch. 11.25. 

Gr. renders it very properly 6vo opviOiUj 

two little birds. IT And scarlet. That 

is, a lock of wool which had been dyed 

in purple or scarlet dye. IT Hyssop. 

See Note on Ex. 12. 22. 

5, Killed in an earthen vessel, over 
running water. The question will 
here very naturally occur, how the bird 
could properly be said to be killed over 
^ running ' water, when it was to be at 
the same time in an ^ earthen vessel.' 
But the apparent discrepancy is removed 
at once when we remark, that the phrase 
iu the original is ti^'^'in ti^?2 mayim 
hayim, living water, and that nothing 
more is meant than that the bird was to 
be killed over an earthen vessel partly 
filled with fresh, spring, or living water, 
in opposition to that which had been 
employed for any other purpose, or was 
stale from long standing. And so 
wherever the same epithet occurs else- 
where in the present chapter. ^ Shall 

let the living bird loose into the open 
Jicld. Perhaps to intimate symboli- 



and after that he shall come into 
the camp, and i shall tarry abroad 
out of his tent seven days. 

9 But it shall be on the seventh 
day, that he shall shave all his hair 
off his head, and his beard, and his 
eye-brows, even all his hair he 
shall shave off; and he shall wash 
his clothes, also he shall wash his 
flesh in water, and he shall be clean. 

10 And on the eighth day khe 
shall take two he-lambs without 
blemish, and one ewe-lamb of the 
first year without blemish, and 
three tenth-deals of fine flour for 
la meat-offering, mingled with oil, 
and one log of oil. 

11 And the priest that maketh 
him clean, shall present the man 
that is to be made clean, and those 
things, before the Lord, at the 
door of the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation. 

i Numb. 12. 15. k Matt. 8. 4. Mark 1. 44. 
Luke 5. 14. 1 cb. 2. 1. Numb. 16. 4. 15. 



cally, that the leper was now released 
from his confinement, and restored to 
free intercourse with society, as the 
scape-bird was to the rest of its kind. 

The Offering required to be brought 
for his further cleansing. 
10. And on the eighth day he shall 
take two he-lambs, &c. After having 
submitted to the seven days' restriction, 
or quarantine, in the manner prescribed 
above, the recovered leper was required, 
on the day immediately succeeding, to 
bring, in order to complete his purifica- 
tion, a trespass, a sin, and a burnt-offer- 
ing ; — a male lamb for each of the for- 
mer, and a female for the latter. An- 
nexed to each he was to present a meal- 
offering, consisting of an omer of flour, 
with oil to make it into bread or cakes, 
and another log, or half pint of oil, by 
itself, for another purpose, v. 15. 16. 
As the accompanying ceremonies were 
substantially the same with those al- 
ready detailed in preceding chapters, it 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIV. 



129 



12 And the priest shall take one 
he-lamb, and ^ offer him for a 
trespass- off eringj and the log of 
oil, and ^nvave them for a wave- 
offering before the Lohd. 

13 And he shall slay the lamb 
in the place where he shall kill 
the sin-offering and the burnt-offer- 
ing, in the holy place : for p as the 
sin-offering is the priest's, so is the 
trespass-offering: qit 25 most holy. 

14 And the priest shall take some 
of the blood of the trespass-offer- 
ing, and the priest shall put it 
r upon the tip of the right ear of 
him that is to be cleansed, and 
upon the thumb of his right hand, 
and upon the great toe of his right 
foot. 

15 And the priest shall take^ome 
of the log of oil, and pour it into 
the palm of his own left hand : 

16 And the priest shall dip his 
right finger in the oil that is in his 
left hand, and shrJl sprinkle of the 
oil with his finger seven times be- 
fore the Lord. 

17 And of the rest of the oil that 
is in his hand, shall the priest put 
upon the tip of the right ear of him 
that is to be cleansed, and upon 
the thumb of his right hand, and 

m ch. 5. 2, 18, and 6. 6, 7. n Exod. 29. 24. 
Exod. 29. 11. ch. 1. 6, 11, and 4. 4, 24. 
P ch. 7. 7. q ch. 2. 3, and 7. 6, and 21. 22. 
r Exod. 29. 20. ch, S. 23. 

will be unnecessary to dwell upon the 
various particulars. For these the 
reader can consult Ainsworth or Patrick. 
14. The priest shall put it upon the 
tip of his right ear, &c. Probably to 
denote, by this significant act, that now 
liis sin being graciously remitted, and 
he received again into communion with 
his people, he was laid under fresh ob- 
ligation to hearken heedfully to the 
divine commands, and to render a more 
active and strenuous service to his 
heavenly Benefactor. See Note on Ex. 
29. 20, where this ceremony in refer- 
ence to the priests is fully explained. 



upon the great toe of his right foot, 
upon the blood of the trespass-of- 
fering. 

18 And the remnant of the oil 
that is in the priest's hand he shall 
pour upon the head of him that is 
to be cleansed : s and the priest 
shall make an atonement for him 
before the Lord. 

19 And the priest shall offer t the 
sin-offering, and make an atone- 
ment for him that is to be cleansed 
from his uncleanness ; and after- 
ward he shall kill the burnt- 
offering. 

20 And the priest shall offer the 
burnt-offering, and the meat-offer- 
ing upon the altar : and the priest 
shall make an atonement for him, 
and he shall be clean. 

21 And u if he be poor, and cannot 
get so much; then he shall take 
one lamb /or a trespass- offering to 
be waved, to make an atonement 
for him, and one tenth-deal of fine 
flour mingled with oil for a meat- 
offering, and a log of oil ; 

22 w And two turtle-doves, or two 
young pigeons, such as he is able 
to get ,• and the one shall be a sin- 
offering, and the other a burnt- 
offering. 

23 s And he shall bring them on 

s ch. 4. 26. t ch. 5. 1, 6, and 12. 7. u ch. 
6. 7, and 12. 8. ^v ch. 12. 8, and 15. 14, 15, 
X ver. 11. 



Commutation of Offerings appointed 
for the Poor, 

21, 22. If he be poor, and cannot get 
so much. Heb. n:}U3^ 11*^ I'^i^ ain 
yado massegeth, his hand attain it not ; 
an idiom occasionally elsewhere occur- 
ring, and indicating want of ability, as 
below, V. 22, 30, 31. Lev. 27. 8. On 
the provision itself see the remarks in 
the Note on Lev. 5. 7. 

23-32. And he shall bring them, &c. 
The same circumstances and ceremonies 
were to mark the offering of the poor 
leper as of the rich. His lamb was to 



130 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



the eighth day for his cleansing 
unio the priest, unto the door of 
the tabernacle of the congregation, 
before the Lord. 

24 y And the priest shall take the 
lamb of the trespass-offering, and 
the log of oil, and the priest shall 
wave them for a wave-ofiering 
before the Lord. 

25 And he shall kill the lamb of 
the trespass-offering, z and the 
priest shall take some of the blood 
of the trespass-offering, and put it 
upon the tip of the right ear of him 
that is to be cleansed, and upon 
the thumb of his right hand, and 
upon the great toe of his right foot. 

26 And the priest shall pour of 
the oil into the palm of his own 
left hand. 

27 And the priest shall sprinkle 
with his right finger some of the oil 
that is in his left hand seven times 
before the Lord : 

28 And the priest shall put of the 
oil that is in his hand, upon the tip 
of the right ear of him that is to 
be cleansed, and upon the thumb 
of his right hand, and upon the 

y ver. 12. z ver. 14. 

be waved ; its blood smeared upon his 
ear, thumb, and toe ; which were also 
to be anointed with the oil out of the 
log ; and his turtle and pigeon offered 
to the same effect, and with like avail- 
ableness as in the foregoing cases. 

The Detection and Cleansing of Lepro- 
sy in Houses. 
34. When — I put the plague of lepro- 
sy in a house, &c. This language would 
appear at first blush to countenance the 
idea generally entertained by the Jews, 
that the leprosy was a supernatural dis- 
ease, inflicted immediately by God 
himself. But in the Hebrew idiom God 
is often said to do what, in the course 
of his providence, he mcvely permits to 
be done. * The house-leprosy here de- 
scribed has occasioned much perplexity 



great toe of his right foot, upon the 
place of the blood of the trespass- 
offering. 

29 And the rest of the oil that is 
in the priest's hand, he shall put 
upon the head of him that is to be 
cleansed, to make an atonement 
for him before the Lord. 

30 And he shall offer the one of 
a the turtle-doves, or of the young 
pigeons, such as he can get ; 

31 Even such as he is able to get, 
the one for a sin-offering, and the 
other ybr a burnt-offering, with the 
meat-offering. And the priest shall 
make an atonement for him that 
is to be cleansed, before the Lord. 

32 This is the law of him in 
whom is the plague of leprosy, 
whose hand is not able to get ^ that 
which pertaineth to his cleansing. 

33 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses and unto Aaron, saying, 

34 c When ye be come into the 
land of Canaan, which I give to 
you for a possession, and I put the 
plague of leprosy in a house of the 
land of your possession ; 

a ver. 22. ch. 15. 15. t> ver. 10. c Qen. 
17. 18. Numb. 32. 22. Deut. 7. 1, and 32. 49. 



to inquirers ,• and the difficulty has pro- 
bably arisen from being led by the name 
to look upon this ' leprosy,' as well as 
that in clothes, as something akin to 
the human disease so called. Men, 
clothes, and stones have not the same 
diseases, but from some analogous cir- 
cumstances, real or fanciful, the dis- 
eases of men may be, and have been, by 
a figure of speech, applied to diseases 
in other things. Indeed, to this day, 
there are certain disorders of trees in 
Egypt and Palestine to which the name 
of* leprosy ' is given. In Switzerland, 
also, they speak of a cancer in build- 
ings on the same principle ; and why 
should we not understand the leprosy in 
buildings of the present text as some- 
thing of a similar description ? If we 
believe that the house-leprosy was any 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIV. 



131 



thing related to the disorder of the 
same name in man, it is extremely diffi- 
cult to account for the symptoms and 
mode of treatment, and we cannot per- 
haps do better than agree with the Rab- 
bins and some of the early Christian 
fathers, who believed that this leprosy 
was not natural, but was sent by God as 
an extraordinary punishment upon evil- 
doers, to compel them to the public 
acknowledgment and atonement of some 
undetected crime, whereby others had 
been injured. Calmet, however, seems 
to think that this disorder was caused 
by animalcula, which eroded the stone 
like mites in a cheese, and might then 
be called leprosy, because, according to 
his theory, the disorder of that name in 
man and in clothes was produced in 
much the same manner. (See the Dis- 
sertation prefixed to his Commentary 
on Leviticus.) There is another v/ay 
of accounting for its connexion with 
human leprosy, v>rhich is, by supposing 
that the walls had taken a leprous con- 
tagion from man, and were in a condi- 
tion, when really infected, to transmit 
it to men. In this case, the difficulty 
remains of understanding the details 
which are given of the appearances 
which the walls presented. There is 
also not a word said which can be con- 
strued to intimate that the house-leprosy 
was infectious to man ; on the contrary, 
the direction to remove the furniture 
before the priest entered to inspect the 
house, lest it should partake in the sen- 
tence of uncleanness vs'hich he might 
see occasion to pronounce, is the very 
way best calculated to have propagated 
the leprous contagion, if any capable 
of being communicated to man had ex- 
isted. Michaelis gives an explanation 
which seems more clearly to elucidate 
the subject than any other which has 
fallen under cur notice, and the rejec- 
tion of which seems to leave no other 
alternative than the acceptance of the 
rabbinical interpretation which we have 
mentioned. He observes that walls and 
houses are often attacked with some- 



thing that corrodes and consumes them, 
and which is called by the Germans 
^ saltpetre,' but which we will call 
' mural salt.' This mural incrustation, 
or efflorescence, chiefly appears in damp 
situations, in cellars and ground-floors, 
seldom extending to the upper stories 
of a house j and its effects are in many 
respects so injurious as to justify, and 
indeed to require, in some climates, the 
attention of a legislator. The appear- 
ances which such walls exhibit corres- 
pond very well with the description 
given in this chapter : the spots, in- 
deed, are not often of a greenish or red- 
dish hue, though they are sometimes 
met with of the latter color. The 
analogy is indeed in general so clear, 
that Michaelis says he had known more 
than one example of children who, 
shortly after reading the account here 
given of the house-leprosy, have come 
with terror to relate that they had dis- 
covered it on the walls of the cellar. 
They ^ described it distinctly or figura- 
tively to their parents, and were laughed 
at for their pains. Laughed at they 
certainly ought not to have been, but in- 
structed. Their acute vision had shown 
them what many a learned man has in 
vain sought to find out.' The detri- 
mental effects of this efiiorescence are 
fully detailed by the same author ('Com- 
mentaries,' vol. iii. pp. 298-305). The 
following is the substance of his state- 
ment. The walls become mouldy, and 
that to such a degree, as, in consequence 
of the corrosion spreading farther and 
farther, at last to occasion their tum- 
bling down. The plaster also requires 
frequent repairing, as it blisters, as it 
is called, that is, detaches itself from 
the wall, swells, and then falls ofi*. 
The things that lie near the walls thus 
affected become damaged, and in the 
end spoiled. Books and other articles 
that cannot bear dampness and acids 
are often ruined from this cause. If 
this ' saltpetre ' be strong in the occu- 
pied apartments, it is very injurious to 
health, particularly where people sleep 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



35 And he that owneth the house 
shall come and tell the priest, say- 
ing, It seemeth to me there is as it 
were ^ a plague in the house : 

36 Then the priest shall command 
that they empty the house before 
the priest go into it to see the 
plague, that all that is in the house 
be not made unclean ; and after- 

(l Ps. 91. 10. Prov. 3. 33. Zecli. 5. 4. 

near the wall. If such eifects be expe- 
rienced in modern Europe, there is 
room to conclude that they were more 
strongly exhibited at the early period 
under notice, and in countries where 
domestic architecture never attained 
much perfection, and where people gen- 
erally live in houses having but one 
story. Taking this to be the ^ house- 
leprosy * of the Scriptures, the object 
of the Mosaic ordinance is sufficiently 
intelligible.' — Pict. Bib. 

35. He that owneth the house shall 
coine and tell the priest^ saying^ It 
seemeth to me there is as it were a plague 
in the house. That is, the plague of 
leprosy. The ov/ner, it seems, was to 
speak in a qualified and dubious man- 
ner, it being the office of the priest to 
pronounce a positive sentence on the 
subject. ^ Although he be a wise man,' 
says Maimonides, ^ and knoweth cer- 
tainly that it is the plague, he may not 
determine and say. The plague appear- 
eth to me in the house ; but he shall 
say, It seemeth to me there is as it 
were the plague,' &c. The serious ul- 
timate loss he might sustain rendered 
it the interest of the owner to give the 
earliest intimation on the subject, and 
to be attentive to the first indications 
of infection. If it gained ground, he 
not only lost his house, but probably 
his furniture, which we have no reason 
to conclude to have been rem.oved pre- 
vious to inspection, unless when early 
information came from the owner him- 
self; and if the priest, on inspection, 
declared the house unclean, it is obvious 



ward the priest shall go in to see 
the house : 

37 And he shall look on the 
plague, and behold, if the plague 
6e in the walls of the house, with 
hollow streaks, greenish, or red- 
dish, which in sight are lower than 
the wall ; 

38 Then the priest shall go out 
of the house to the door of the 



that everything which remained in it 
became unclean also. 

36. And the priest shall command that 
they empty the house. Heb. 113&1 
U'pinnu, and they shall prepare ; i. e. 
by removing all articles of furniture, 
and every thing that would prevent or 
impede the due examination of the 
premises. 

37. With hollow streaks. This was in 
effect the same kind of criterion that 
was established for detecting the leprosy 
in the human body. If a spot was deeper 
than the skin of the flesh it was decid- 
edly a bad symptom ; so when these 
hollow streaks or rather depressed cavi- 
ties appeared in the wall of a house, 
showing that corrosion had already 
taken place, it was a clear sign that it 
was a house-leprosy. The original word 
iTi^I'lS^plS^ shekaaruroth, is a compo.und 
word with the import of sunk or loiv- 
lying, and here doubtless implies an 
effect on the stones which we should 
describe by the word pitted. The Gr. 
has KuiXaScg, little hollows, and the Vulg. 
' valliculas,' little vallies. But the idea 
of long streaks or creases, conveyed by 
our translation, does not seem to be 
warranted by the original, nor does 
there appear to be any evidence that 
this kind of caries or gangrene in stones 
corroded them in streaks. It was ra- 
ther, we m.ay suppose, in spots. 

IT Which in sight are lower than the 
wall. That is, which are deeper than 
the surface of the wall. 

38. Then the priest shall go out of 
the house, &c. The particularity with 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIV. 



133 



house, and shut up the house seven 
days: 

39 And the priest shall come again 
the seventh da}^, and shall look ; 
and behold, if the plague be spread 
in the walls of the house ; 

40 Then the priest shall command 
that they take away the stones in 
which the plague z5, and they shall 
cast them into an unclean place 
without the city : 

41 And he shall cause the house 
to be scraped within round about, 
and they shall pour out the dust 
that they scrape off v/ithout the 
city into an unclean place : 

42 And they shall take other 
stones, and put them in the place 
of those stones ; and he shall take 
other mortar, and shall plaster the 
house. 

which these circumstances are men- 
tioned, doubtless implies that there 
was someting very formal in the manner 
of his pausing at the door, and ordering 
it to be effectually closed, that after the 
prescribed interval he might return and 
pronounce a more definite judgment. 
The plague would sooner appear in a 
vacant than in an occupied house. 

40, 41. That they take away the stones 
in which the plague is. That is, as far 
as the leprous infection had extended in 
the Yv-alls, It is remarkable that the 
very same steps are requisite when a 
house in modern times is infected v\rith 
the nitrous incrustration. The spot or 
stone which produces it must be abso- 
lutely removed ; and the scraping and 
fresh plastering is also necessary. 
When any part of the walls impregnated 
with this substance is suffered to remain, 
it always effloresces anew, and beomes 
as bad as before. In large European 
buildings it is not indeed necessary to 
replaster the whole house, and the dif- 
ference in this respect may be accounted 
for by the apparent smallness of the 
Hebrev/ houses. 

43-45. If the plague come again, &c. 
12 



43 And if the plague come again, 
and break out in the house, after 
that he hath taken away the 
stones, and after he hath scraped 
the house, and after it is plastered ; 

44 Then the priest shall come and 
look ; and behold, if the plague be 
spread in the house, it is e a fret- 
ting leprosy in the house : it is un- 
clean. ^ 

45 And he shall break down the 
house, the stones of it, and the 
timber thereof, and all the mortar 
of the house : and he shall carry 
them forth out of the city into an 
unclean place. 

46 Moreover, he that goeth into 
the house all the while that it is 
shut up, shall be unclean until the 
even. 

e ch. 13. 51. Zech. 5. 4. 



It was possible that notwithstanding all 
the precautions thus ordered to be 
taken, their efforts might still be una- 
vailing, and the taint of leprosy disclose 
itself in the Avails of the house. Where 
this was the case, the only remaining 
alternative was utterly to demolish the 
building, and cast away the materials 
as abhorred and polluted rubbish, into 
some place equally unclean and abom- 
inable. A leprous house was not to be 
permitted to stand. The injury which 
such houses might do to the health of 
the inhabitants, or to the articles they 
contained, was of more consequence in 
the estimation of Moses than the build- 
ings themselves. Those to whom this 
appears strange, and who lament the 
fate of a house pulled down by legal 
authority, probably think of large and' 
magnificent houses like ours, of many 
stories high, which cost a great deal of 
money, and in the second story of which 
the people are generally secure from all 
danger of the saltpetre ; but the houses 
of those days were low, and of very 
little value. 

46, 47. He that goeth into the houscy 
&c. The bare entering within the door 



134 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



47 And he that lieth in the house 
shall wash his clothes: and he 
that eateth in the house shall wash 
his clothes. 

48 And if the priest shall come 
in, and look upon it, and behold, 
the plague hath not spread in the 
house, after the house was plas- 

^ tered : then the priest shall pro- 
nounce the house clean, because 
the plague is healed. 

49 And f he shall take to cleanse 
the house two birds, and cedar- 
wood, and scarlet, and hyssop : 

50 And he shall kill the one of 
the birds in an earthen vessel, over 



running water : 



f ver. 4. 



of a suspected house, without making 
any stay there, incurred defilement, and 
imposed separation during the rest of 
the day. But one that ventured to 
lodge or eat in the house under these 
circumstances, as he was in more dan- 
ger of bringing away the infection, was 
required to wash his clothes before he 
could enjoy his usual intercourse with 
the people. This was an ordinance 
well calculated to convey a moral ad- 
monition in respect to the duty of 
avoiding all suspected persons and 
places, or as the apostle terms it, of 
* abstaining from the least appearance 
of evil.' 

4<S-53. The priest shall pronounce 
the house clean. Heb. "iHtO tihar, shall 
make clean. Gr. KaOapiei, shall purify. 
That is, shall do this declaratively, as 
explained above, ch. 13. 3. The verdict 
thus pronounced was to be accompanied 
Vv'ith the same ofierings and rites of 
purification as in the case of leprous 
persons pronounced clean. ' The se- 
rious investigation which the matter 
had undergone, and this final and sol- 
emn declaration, that the house was 
clean, together with the ofi'ering made 
on the occasion, was well calculated to 
make the fact known, and to relieve the 
public mind from any anxiety which 



51 And he shall take the cedar- 
wood, and the hyssop, and the 
scarlet, and the living bird, and dip 
them in the blood of the slain bird, 
and in the running water, and |l 
sprinkle the house seven times : '" 

52 And he shall cleanse the house 
with the blood of the bird, and with 
the running water, and with the 
living bird, and with the cedar- 
wood, and with the hyssop, and 
with the scarlet: 

53 But he shall let go the living 
bird out of the city into the open 
fields, and g make an atonement 
for the house : and it shall be 
clean. 

S ver. 20. 



might be entertained concerning the 
spread of the house-leprosy, and at the 
same time to exonerate the proprietor 
from any inconvenience to which he 
might have been exposed from the un- 
ascertained suspicion that the infection 
was in his house. Michaelis extols the 
whole of this law concerning ' house- 
leprosy' exceedingly, under the view 
which he was led to take of it, and in 
which we have chiefly followed him ; 
and although it is probably attended 
with less evil in Europe than in the 
East, he inclines to wish that some 
similar regulations operated in newly- 
built cities. It is, however, a remark- 
able fact that, so far from this being the 
case, the sovereigns of Germany, and 
probably also in other countries, did all 
in their power to encourage the mural 
incrustation when saltpetre became 
necessary in the manufacture of gun- 
powder. They established their right 
to the product of the incrustation, even 
in private houses, as a sovereign regale ; 
and the collectors took care, in scraping 
it ofi" periodically, to leave the roots (if 
we may so express it), to form the 
source of a future crop 3 and the inhab- 
itants dared not extirpate it altogether. 
The collection came, in the end, to be 
farmed out by the sovereign ; and the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIV. 



135 



54 This is the law for all manner 
of plague of leprosy, and i^ scall, 

5o And for the i leprosy of a gar- 
ment, k and of an house, 

t ch. 13. 30. 1 ch. 13. 47. ^ ver. 34. 

saltpetre regale altogether formed a 
most odious oppression, more bitterly 
complained of by the people than al- 
most any other. On this point see 
Beckmann's ' Hist, of Inventions,' vol. 
ii. pp. 476 — 478 ; and Michaelis, vol. 
iii. p. 304.'— Pic^ Bih. 

bl. To teach when it is unclean and 
when it is clean. That is, to teach 
the priest when to pronounce a person 
or house clean or unclean. Heb. tllinp 
inton t31^:m J^^at^n tJl'^n lehoroth be. 
yom hattame u-beyom hattdhor, to teach 
in the day of the unclean and in the day 
of the clean. ' Day ' appears here to be 
used of the things or transactions that 
should occur in it. ^ To teach in the 
day ' of any thing, is to teach respect- 
ing the works or duties appropriated to 
that day or season. It is a Heb. idiom 
of which the full force cannot be very 
well expressed in any other language. 

Remarks.— (2, 3.) ' He shall be 
brought unto the priest ; and the priest 
shall go forth out of the camp,' &c. 
The mmisters of righteousness are to be 
always ready to meet the returning pen- 
itent, who would fain be cleansed from 
the defilement of sin, or who hopes he 
has been, and welcome him back to the 
fold of Christ. 

(4.) ' Then shall the priest command 
to take for him,' &c. A very remark- 
able difference marks the vast superi- 
oniy of our great High Priest over the 
high priest of the Jev/s. The latter, 
being a mere man, and himself com- 
passed with infirmity, could not heal 
the leper; he could only discover by 
inspection when he was already healed 
by God, and then by his office declare 
this to the people. He was then to 
perform, the ceremonies appointed for 



56 And ifor a rising, and for a 
scab, and for a bright spot : 

57 To m teach when it is unclean, 
and when tt is clean : this is the 
law of leprosy. 

1 ch. 13. 2. mDeut. 24. 8. Ezek. 44. 23. 

his cleansing, and thus restore him 
again to society and to the privileges of 
God's house. But the Lord Jesus heals 
the leper. ^ Lord, if thou wilt thou 
canst make me clean ; and Jesus put 
forth his hand, and touched him, and 
said, I will, be thou clean; and imme- 
diately his leprosy departed from him 
and he was cleansed.' To this great 
Physician, then, let us resort, to obtain 
that moral cleansing for which there is 
neither cure nor relief in any other 
quarter. Let us cry to him as did the 
leper, in the day of his flesh, ' Jesus, 
master, have mercy on us !' and God 
himself shall acknowledge and pro- 
nounce us clean. The hyssop is even 
now ready w^herewith to sprinkle our 
souls. Let us use it by faith, and we 
s.hall experience with David its unfail- 
ing efficacy ; ' Purge me with hyssop, 
and I shall be clean ; wash me, and I 
shall be whiter than snow.' But let us 
be sprinkled not once or twice only, but 
' seven times,' then shall we be ' washed 
thoroughly from our iniquity, and be 
cleansed from our sin.' 

(9.) The leper did not come at once 
into the camp, after he had been pro- 
nounced clean, and sprinkled according 
to the ordinance. He was not admitted 
to his tent, or restored to society, till 
after living in some place alone for 
seven days more ; and then after again 
washing his body and his clothes, and 
shaving off all his hair, even to his eye- 
brows, he was reinstated in all his for- 
mer privileges and comforts. This was 
designed to remind us, that the infec- 
tion of nature, the defiling effects of sin, 
still remain, even in those u^ho are re- 
generate, and force upon us the necessity 
of a daily washing in Christ, in order to 
our perfect cleansing. It is only in 



136 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490, 



CHAPTER XV. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses and to Aaron, saying, 
2 Speak unto the children of Is- 

a ch. 22. 4. Numb. 5. 2. 2 Sam. 3. 29. 
Matt. 9. 20. Mark 5. 25. Luke 8. 43. 

heaven that we can be pronounced fully 
delivered from our remaining corrup- 
tions. But there is, as it were, the short 
period of a single week before that 
event arrives, when we shall be intro- 
duced to our Father's house, to our eter- 
nal home. The intervening time must 
indeed be spent in humiliating and 
painful exercises, but those exercises 
are only preparing us for the richer en- 
joyment of the promised bliss. 

(14.) The application of the blood 
and oil to the ear, the thumb, and the 
toe of the leper, seems to intimate that 
every member of the body, and every 
faculty of the soul, needs a special puri- 
fication from guilt and corruption, and 
a special consecration in the renewed 
man to the service of God. The lan- 
guage of the solemn rite was virtually 
this : ' Now you are made clean, let all 
your faculties and powers be devoted to 
the service of God. Let your ears be 
open to the commands of God. Let the 
work of your hands be bestowed upon 
the business of your high calling, and 
the accomplishment of the divine will. 
Let your footsteps be ordered in his 
word.' 

(15.) Neither the blood nor the oil 
were on any account to be omitted in 
the purification of the leper j nor can 
either of them be omitted in the restora- 
tion of our souls to God. The oil sig- 
nificantly shadowed forth the Holy 
Ghost as a spirit of sanctification. By 
the blood we are justified, and by the 
oil we are sanctified. And it is worthy 
of remark, that the order to the leper 
was, that the oil should be put upon 
the blood of the trespass-oifering, hint- 
ing that the blood of Christ must first 
be applied for our justification, and that 
then the Spirit will be given for our 



rael, and say unto them, a When 
any man hath a running issue out 
of his flesh, because o/his issue he 
is unclean. 

3 And this shall be his unclean- 
ness, in his issue : whether his 

sanctification. This is the more care- ^_ 
fully to be observed^ inasmuch as men ■ 
are very prone to reverse this estab- 
lished order. We seek sanctification 
first, and then make our attainments a 
ground of justification. But our plea 
on this score will be rejected. We are 
* justified /ree/7/ through grace.'' 



CHAPTER XV. 

Of various Personal Uncleannesses and 

Purifications. 

2. When any man hath a running 
out of his flesh. Heb. '21 iT^n^ ^^ 
I^IDIQIO ki yihy'eh zah mibbesdro, when 
he shall be flowing from his flesh. Gr* 
CO sav yevrjTai pvaig £k tov crcoixaros avrov^ 
to whomsoever there shall be an issue or 
flux from his body. The term * flesh' 
is undoubtedly here an euphemism, it 
being used in the same sense in which 
it occurs Gen. 17. 13, Ezek. 16. 26. As 
to the disease itself which is here men- 
tioned, though usually expressed by the 
Gr. term yovoppeia^ gonorrhcza^ which 
has become familiar in English nosolo- 
gy, yet it is not certain that it was in- 
tended to designate the bad infection 
known by it in modern times. If it 
were, the disease probably existed in a 
much milder form than the virulent 
complaint so denominated among us, 
and which a retributive providence has 
made in general the inseparable conse- 
quent of guilty indulgence. But it is 
for the most part understood by the 
Jews of the natural seed-ilux, v;hich 
arises from debility of the spermatic 
organs. 

3. This shall be his uncleanness in 
his issue. That is, in these things, 
which he goes on to specify, shall con- 
sist the uncleanness of the man who is 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XV. 



137 



flesh run with his issue, or his flesh 
he stopped from his issue, it is his 
uiicleanness. 

4 Every bed whereon he lieth that 
hath the issue, is unclean: and 
every thing whereon he sitteth, 
shall be unclean. 

5 And whosoever toucheth his 
bed, shall wash his clothes, t> and 
bathe himself in water, and be un- 
clean until the even. 

6 And he that sitteth on tt/i?/ thing 
whereon he sat that hath the issue, 
shall wash his clothes, and bathe 
himself in water, and be unclean 
until the even. 

7 And he that toucheth the flesh 
of him that hath the issue, shall 
wash his clothes, and bathe him- 
self in water, and be unclean until 
the even. 

8 And if he that hath the issue 
spit upon him that is clean ; then 

b ch. 11. 25, and 17. 15. 

affected by gonorrhaea. M Or his 

Jlesh be stopped from his issue. That 
is, clogged, obstructed, so as to prevent, 
by its thickening, a free and easy emis- 
sion. In either of the cases mentioned 
the man was made unclean, and com- 
municated his defilement to the beds, 
benches, &c., with which he came in 
contact, and through them to any one 
who might chance to sit or lie upon them, 
so that he was required to bathe him- 
self in water and wash his clothes, and 
be considered unclean till evening. 

12. The vessel of earth — shall be bro- 
ken ; and every vessel of wood shall be 
rinsed in icater. A similar command 
as to earthen vessels, is given ch. 6. 38, 
where it is also directed that vessels of 
brass should be scoured. Michaelis 
asks why earthen vessels could not be 
as well cleansed by washing as those 
of wood or copper. In reply to this, 
Mr. Kitto saj's :— ' Without entering into 
the question as to the art of glazing 
earthenware, it is our strong impression 
that the earthen vessels which Moses 
12* 



he shall wash his clothes, and bathe 
himself in water, and be unclean 
until the even. 

9 And what saddle soever he rid- 
eth upon that hath the issue, shall 
be unclean. 

10 And whosoever toucheth any 
thing that was under him, shall be 
unclean until the even : and he that 
beareth any of those things, shall 
wash his clothes, and bathe him- 
self in. water, and be unclean until 
the even. 

11 And whomsoever he toucheth 
that hath the issue (and hath not 
rinsed his hands in water) he shall 
wash his clothes, and bathe himself 
in water, and be unclean until the 
even. 

12 And the c vessel of earth that 
he toucheth which hath the issue, 
shall be broken : and every vessel 
of wood shall be rinsed in water. 

c ch. G. 28, and 11. 32, 33. 

directed to be broken were not glazed. 
It is evident that glazed vessels may be 
as well or better cleansed from every 
impurity, by washing, than hard wood, 
or even copper ; whereas unglazed ves- 
sels, from their porous nature, would 
receive a more permanent taint from 
any accidental defilement than either. 
Indeed, we would venture to be more 
definite, arid point to a sort of pottery, 
which escaped the notice of Michaelis, 
as most probabl)^ that to which the 
direction may be understood with pecu- 
liar propriety to apply. In Egypt and 
Western Asia, the inhabitants have, in 
common use, vessels of porous clay, 
lightly baked, and rather thin in pro- 
portion to the size of the vessel. They 
are exclusively used for the purifying 
and cooling of water. The v/ater con- 
stantly oozes through the minute pores 
of the vessel, forming a thick dew or 
moisture on the outer surface, the rapid 
evaporation of which reduces the tem- 
perature of the vessel, and of the water 
it contains, much belov/ that of the at- 



138 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



13 And when he that hath an 
issue is cleansed of his issue ; then 
<3he shall number to himself seven 
days for his cleansing, and wash 
his clothes, and bathe his flesh in 
running water, and shall be clean. 

14 And on the eighth day he shall 
take to him e two turtle-doves, or 
two young pigeons, and come be- 
fore the Lord, unto the door of the 
tabernacle of the congregation, and 
give them unto the priest : 



d ver. 2S. ch. 14. 8. 



ch. 14. 22, 23 



mosphere ; by which means the inhab- 
itants are enabled to obtain, in the 
warmest weather, water perfectly cool 
for drink. The water, as it passes 
through, is filtered to the most perfect 
clearness ; and, for family use, there 
are large vessels of this sort, propped 
upon frames of wood, with other vessels 
of similar clay, but different form, 
placed underneath to receive the filtered 
water that drops from the outer surface 
of the other. Thus a supply of water, 
perfectly clear and refreshingly cool, 
is at once secured. Jugs of various 
sizes, and elegant but fragile drinking- 
cups, of the same clay, are also em- 
ployed to keep the filtered water cool 
while at hand for occasional use, and 
while being actually used. Now the 
manufacture of these percolating vessels 
originated in Egypt in very ancient 
times, and they are still made there in 
great perfection. If the invention as- 
cends to the time of Moses, there can 
be no question that the Israelites were 
acquainted with the art of making them, 
and would questionless use them for 
the purpose of purifying and refrigerat- 
ing the generally bad water of the 
deserts through which they wandered j 
and as they had vessels of wood and 
copper for other purposes, it is not too 
much to suppose that their earthen ves- 
sels were almost exclusively of this 
description ; for to this day a wandering 
people do not like to encumber them- 
selves with numerous earthen vessels, 



15 And the priest shall offer them, 
f the one /or a sin-olFering, and the 
other for a burnt-offering ; g and 
the priest shall make an atonement 
for him before the Lord for his 
issue. 

16 And hif any man's seed of 
copulation go out from him, then fj 
he shall wash all his flesh in water, " 
and be unclean until the even. 

17 And every garment, and every 

f ch. 14. 30, 31. S ch. 14. 19, 31. b ch."22. 
4. Deut. 23. 10. 



which are so liable to be broken in their 
removals. Assuming, then, that such 
were their vessels, — the direction to 
break them when defiled is easy to be 
understood, because, from their remark- 
ably porous nature, whatever spot, stain, 
or other impurity they receive, is at 
once absorbed into their mass, either 
immediately or through the agency of 
the water, and it becomes impossible to 
cleanse them entirely by any common 
process. In fact, we have with our own 
hands broken many jugs and drinking- 
cups of this description, when they re- 
ceived some accidental contamination, 
from the spontaneous feeling that they 
had become wholly defiled, and could 
not be cleansed. It seems to us that 
the explanation we have here given will 
account more satisfactorily than any 
other for the distinction which has oc- 
casioned so much perplexity to Mi- 
chaelis and other commentators. Simi- 
lar usages to those which the text 
inculcates, as to the treatment of defiled 
vessels, prevailed among the ancient 
Egyptians, and still do so among the 
Mohammedans and Hindoos.' — P. Bib. 
13. Then shall he number to himself 
seven days, &c. During this time he 
was to keep himself secluded by way 
of testing the completeness of his cure j 
and if the issue ceased entirely for that 
whole week, he was then to consider 
himself so far clean as to be entitled to 
offer the following sacrifices as an atone- 
ment for having been legally unclean. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XV. 



139 



skin whereon is the seed of copu- 
lation, shall be washed with wa- 
ter, and be unclean until the even. 

18 The woman also with whom 
man shall lie with seed of copula- 
tion, they shall hoth bathe them' 
selves in water, and i be unclean 
until the even. 

19 H And k if a woman have an 
issue, and her issue in her flesh be 
blood, she shall be put apart seven 
days : and whosoever toucheth her 
shall be unclean until the even. 

20 And every thing that she lieth 
upon in her separation shall be un- 
clean; every thing also that she 
sitteth upon shall be unclean. 

21 And whosoever toucheth her 
bed shall wash his clothes, and 
bathe himself in. water, and be un- 
clean until the even. 

22 And whosoever toucheth any 
thing that she sat upon shall wash 
his clothes, and bathe himself in 
water, and be unclean until the 
even. 

23 And if it be on her bed, or on 
any thing whereon she sitteth, 
when he toucheth it he shall be 
unclean until the even. 

24 And i if any man lie with her 
at all, and her fio^vers be upon him, 
he shall be unclean seven days : 
and- all the bed whereon he lieth 
shall be unclean, 

25 And if ma woman have an 

1 1 Sam. 21. 4. ^ ch. 12. 2. 1 See ch. 20. IS. 

18. The woman also with whom 7nan_ 
shall lie J &c. The sense of this verse is 
somewhat doubtful, but, as it should 
seem, it refers to the preceding verses, 
viz. the wife, also, in case that should 
happen which is mentioned v. 16, 17, 
shall bathe and be unclean till evening. 

24. And if any man lie with her, &c. 
That is, without knowing her to be in 
that condition ; for if it was done know- 
ingly, both were liable to the punish- 
ment of death. Lev. 20. 8. Comp. 
Lev. 18. 19. See also Ezek. 22. 10. 



issue of her blood many days out 
of the time of her separation, or if 
it run beyond the time of her sepa- 
ration ; all the days of the issue 
of her uncleanness shall be as the 
days of her separation ; she shall 
be unclean. 

26 Every bed whereon she lieth 
all the days of her issue shall be 
unto her as the bed of her separa- 
tion : and whatsoever she sitteth 
upon shall be unclean, as the un- 
cleanness of her separation. 

27 And whosoever toucheth those 
things shall be unclean, and shall 
w^ash his clothes, and bathe him- 
self in water, and be unclean until 
the even. 

28 But n if she be cleansed of her 
issue, then she shall number to 
herself seven days, and after that 
she shall be clean. 

29 And on the eighth day she 
shall take unto her two turtles, or 
tVv^o young pigeons, and bring them 
unto the priest, to the door of the 
tabernacle of the congreo:ation. 

30 And the priest shall offer the 
one for a sin-offering, and the other 
for a burnt-offering ; and the priest 
shall make an atonement for her 
before the Lord for the issue of 
her uncleanness. 

31 Thus shall ye o separate the 
children of Israel from their un- 

m Matt. 9. 20. Mark 5. 25. Luke S. 43. 
n ver. 13, o ch. 11. 47. Deut. 24. 8. Ezek. 
44. 23. 

25. And if a woman have an issue of 
her blood, &c. This refers not to any 
thing natural or ordinary, but to a 
chronic, morbid issue, constituting the 
disease of v\^hich mention is made m the 
gospel, Mat. 9. 20, where a woman 
' which was diseased with an issue of 
blood twelve years,' is said to have 
come behind the Savior and touched the 
hem of his garment, and was made 
whole. 

31. Thus shall ye separate the child- 
ren of Israel from their uncleanness. 



140 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490- 



cleaiiness : that they die not in 
their uncleanness, when they p de- 
file my tabernacle that is among 
them. 
32 q This is the law of him that 
hath an issue, ^ and of him whose 



P Numb. 5. 3, and 19. 13, 20. Ezek. 5. 11, 
and 23. 38. q ver. 2. r ver. 16. 



Heb. iDlD^tn hizzai'tem, from the root 
^t3 ndzavy to separate^ from which 
comes ' Nazarite,' applied to one who 
was peculiarly separated and sanctified 
to the Lord. The use of the term 
plainly implies that the people of Is- 
rael, by their abstinence from every 
thing forbidden, and by their rigid ob- 
servance of all these ordinances, were 
to demean themselves before God as a 
nation of Nazarites. The Gr. has 
ev\ap£LS TToirja-ETE, ye shall make devoutly 
wary. IT When they defile my taber- 
nacle that is among them. Heb. ti<)2u^ 
hetammedmy in their defiling. It is 
clear from this, that one special design 
of these enactments was to secure a 
becoming degree of reverence for the 
Tabernacle. This was the seat and 
throne of the divine glory, and nothing 
was to be allowed within its precincts 
which would go to lower the general 
estimate of the purity and sanctity 
which God would have attached to the 
place of his peculiar residence. Comp. 
Jer. 2. 23, and 7. 30; Ezek. 5. 11,— 
14. 11,-22.3,4,-37.23. 

32. This is the laiv of him that hath 
an issue. ^ We may conclude our re- 
marks upon these chapters relating to 
contagious disorders, and acts causing 
ceremonial uncleanness, by directing 
attention to the admirable regulations 
for preventing contagion. The subject 
is now almost entirely overlooked in 
the East, except so far as regards some 
regulations concerning lepers, which 
appear to have been derived from those 
now before us. We are unacquainted 
Avith any Oriental nations, ancient or 
modern, which had a sanatory code in 



seed goeth from him, and is defiled 
therewith ; 
33 sAnd of her that is sick of her 
flowers, and of him that hath an 
issue, of the man, tand of the wo- 
man, u and of him that lieth with 
her that is unclean. 

s ver. 19. t ver. 25. " ver. 24t 

the slightest degree comparable to this, 
which is indeed scarcely equalled by 
the regulations of the best European 
lazarettos. We have been eye-witnesses 
of the fearful consequences wliich pro- 
ceed in Asiatic countries from the ab- 
sence of any measures to prevent the 
spread of contagious disorders. In 
Mohammedan Asia this may be partly 
owing to the medical doctrine of Mo- 
hammed, v/ho, in his ignorant self- 
sufficiency, undertook, according to one 
of the received traditions, to declare 
that diseases were not contagious. 
This dictum had its weight, although it 
was contrary to the received opinions 
of his lime, for, as the Arabian com- 
mentator remarks, ' It was a belief of 
the people of ignorance, that any one 
sitting near a diseased person, or eating 
with one, would take his disease.' 
(Mischat-ul-Masabih. Calcutta, 1810.) 
It is true that he seems to direct the 
avoidance of intercourse with a persou 
laboring under the elephantiasis — but 
this is a solitary exception to his gen- 
eral rule. Mohammed has adopted 
from the chapter before us, and other 
parts of the Pentateuch, the laws re- 
lating to ceremonial uncleanness, and 
has added many others of his own. But 
there is this difference in the result, 
that uncleanness under his law does not 
generally extend beyond the time when 
the unclean persons bathe and wash 
an}'- defiling stain from their clothes. 
There are some exceptions, chiefly rela- 
tive to females, in which the conse- 
quences of defilement more nearly coin- 
cide with those of the Levitical law.' — 
Fict. Bib. 



i 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVL 



141 



CHAPTER XVI, 

THE DAY OF ATONEMENT. 

The proper place of this chapter, as 
appears from v. 1, would have been im- 
mediately after the tenth ; but the death 
of Aaron's two sons, for their profane 
conduct in the discharge of their office 
as priests, gave occasion to the enact- 
ment of the above cited laws respecting 
the various uncleannesses which dis- 
qualified an Israelite for approaching 
the sanctuary. Those ordinances hav- 
ing been dispatched in the five preceding 
chapters, the regular thread of the 
sacred record is now resumed, and 
Moses goes on to give directions con- 
cerning the great national festival of 
atonement in its various details. 

This is called by the sacred writer 
G'^ViS-'M tll*^ yorn hakkippurim^ day 
of expiations or atonements^ and by the 
modern Jews ^ilS^ kippur. It was so 
called from its having been instituted 
for the expiation of all the sins, irrev- 
erences, and pollutions of all the Israel- 
ites, from the highest priest to the low- 
est people, committed by them through- 
out the year. It w^as observed on the 
tenth day of the seventh month, or 
Tisri, corresponding to a part of our 
September. It was one of the most im- 
portant and interesting days in the 
whole Jewish calendar ; and though 
called occasionally the ^ feast of expia- 
tion,' yet its genuine character was 
rather that of a fast — a day for ' afflict- 
ing their souls,' — and is only called 
• feast ' in the sense of a set solemnity. 
It is the day alluded to. Acts 27. 9: 
^ Now when much time v/as spent, and 
when sailing was now dangerous, be- 
cause the fast was now already past, 
Paul admonished them,' &c. It was in 
all its services and ceremonies the full- 
est representation, the most perfect 
shadow, of the great work of redemp- 
tion 5 the high priest prefiguring, in all 
he did, that which Christ, in the fullness 
of times, was ordained to do. On this 
account a somewhat minute notice of 



the observances of the day may be pro- 
per in this connexion. 

Of so much sacredness was this so- 
lemnity regarded, that the people began 
their preparation for it seven days be- 
fore, by removing the high priest from 
his own house to a chamber in the tem- 
ple, (after the temple v/as built) , lest 
he should contract such a pollution from 
any of his family, as might incur a seven 
days' uncleanness, and thereby unfit him 
for performing his pontifical duties. 
On the third and seventh of these days, 
he was besprinkled with the ashes of 
the red heifer, lest he might inadvert- 
ently have been defiled by a dead body. 
On the morning of the day before that 
of the atonement, they brought him to 
the east gate of the court of the Gen^ 
tiles, where they made bullocks, and 
rams, and lambs to pass before him, 
that he might be the better able to make 
the proper selection j and on every day 
of the seven they caused him to sprinkle 
the blood of the daily sacrifice, to burn 
the parts of it upon the altar, to offer 
the incense, and to trim the lamps, that 
he might be the more familiar with 
these offices, when called to perform 
them. He was moreover committed, 
for a part of each of the days, to some 
of the elders of the Sanhedrim, who 
read to him the rites of the day in order 
to make sure of his going rightly through 
the rubric. He was then conducted into 
the chamber of incense that he might 
learn to handle the incense, and to take 
an oath as to the mode of burning it 
when he entered into the holiest of all. 
Their w^ords on the occasion were as 
follov/s : — ^ High priest, we are the 
messengers of the Sanhedrim, and thou 
art our messenger, and that of the San- 
hedrim ; we adjure thee by Him that 
caused his name to dv/ell in this house, 
that thou alter not any thing of what 
we have spoken unto thee.' The reason 
of this solemn adjuration Vv?as, that a 
Sadducee, in contempt of the written 
word, and of their traditions, at one 
time had dared to kindle the incense 



142 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



without the vail, and to carry it smok- 
ing within ; whereas he ought not to 
have kindled it till within the vail. 
During the night that preceded the 
grand solemnity, he was required to eat 
but sparingly, though he was to fast the 
whole of the next day, for fear that he 
might become drowsy, and thus dese- 
crate in some measure the services of 
the day. This entire night was spent 
in his expounding, or hearing expounded 
to him, the written law. 

The day having at length arrived, the 
high priest laid aside his ordinary dress, 
bathed himself the first time, and put 
on the rich garments peculiar to his 
office. Habited with these, he instantly 
went into the court of the priests, went 
to the laver according to priestly usage, 
to wash his hands and his feet for the 
first time ; proceeded thence to the 
north side of the altar, to kill the morn- 
ing sacrifice ; ascended the altar with 
the several pieces, and laid them on the 
fire ; went into the holy place to trim 
the lamp and offer the incense 5 blessed 
the people on the top of the steps of 
the porch ; and in short did all that be- 
longed to the ordinary morning service. 

Having finished this part of his duty, 
the next thing was to solemnize his 
own mind and the people's by some 
previous sacrifices. These, in Num. 
29. S-11, are said to be as follows: — a 
bullock, a ram, and seven lambs for a 
burnt-offering, with their appropriate 
meal-offerings ; and a kid of the goats 
for a sin-offering. When he had finish- 
ed these, he washed his hands and feet 
a second time at the laver. He then 
retired to a particular chamber of tjj|e 
temple, and proceeded to strip himself 
of his rich habiliments, to bathe himself 
in water a second time, and to put on 
his plain white linen vestments, the 
same dress as that worn by the common 
priests, except that he had the sacer- 
dotal mitre on his head. Thus attired, 
he proceeded to the w^ork of sacrifice. 
Going up to the bullock, and standing 
with his face towards the temple, he 



laid both his hands on the head of the 
animal, and solemnly pronounced the 
following words : ' O Lord, I have sin- 
ned, done perversely, and transgressed 
before thee, I and my house. I beseech 
thee, Lord, expiate the sins, perver- 
sities, and transgressions whereby I 
have sinned, done perversely, and trans- 
gressed, I and my house, as it is written 
in the law of Moses, thy servant, say- 
ing, For in this day he will expiate for 
you, to purge you from all your sins be- 
fore the Lord, that ye may be clean ;' 
referring to v. 30, where these words 
are to be found. 

Having made this confession, he went 
to the north-east corner of the court, 
where the two kids of the goats, intend- 
ed for the congregation, were ordained 
to stand. There he cast lots for the 
two goats, by means of two pieces of 
gold, put into a box called '^Dip kelphij 
on one of which was written niiT^P 
laihovahjfor the Xorc^,and on the other 
it]^t5?^ le-azazelyfor Azazel, rendered 
in our version, ' for the scape-goat,' in 
relation to which an extended discus- 
sion will be found in the ensuing notes. 
He then proceeded to slay the bullock 
for his own sins, and the goat upon 
which the lot had fallen to be sacrificed 
to the Lord ; after which he filled a 
censer with burning coals from the altar, 
and putting two handfuls of incense 
into a vase, he bore them into the holy 
of holies. Having here poured the in- 
cense upon the coals, he returned, took 
the blood of the bullock and the goat, 
and went again into the most holy 
place. With his finger he first sprinkled 
the blood of the bullock, and afterwards 
of the goat, upon the lid of the ark of 
the covenant, and seven times also he 
sprinkled it upon the floor before the 
ark. He then returned from the most 
holy into the holy place, and besmeared 
the horns of the golden altar with the 
blood of the bullock and the goat, and 
jetted the blood seven times over the 
surface of the altar. 

The next duty of the high priest was 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVI. 



143 



CHAPTER XVI. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses after a the death of the 
two sons of Aaron, when they of- 
fered before the Lord, and died : 
2 And the Lord said unto Moses, 

a ch. 10. 1, 2. 

to make an atonement for the holy- 
place, for the tabernacle, and for the 
altar. This was done by sprinkling the 
blood of the bullock and the blood of 
the goat, each right before the vail, 
and then by mingling them together 
and sprinkling the horns and the body 
of the golden altar of incense. 

We are now come, in the order of the 
ceremonies, to the scape-goat, which 
was to be sent away into the wilder- 
ness. To this animal as he stood in 
the court of the priests, the high-priest 
approached, and laying both hands upon 
its head; which was bound around with 
a scarlet thread, made over it a solemn 
confession of the sins of the people of 
Israel, after which it was consigned to 
the hands of a person especially ap- 
pointed to conduct it to some desert 
and desolate region, where it was al- 
lowed an unmolested escape. The 
mystical or typical design of this trans- 
action will be found fully considered in 
a subsequent note. The Jewish writers 
detail a multitude of additional cere- 
monies connected with the dismission 
of the scape-goat, but as they are obvi- 
ously of a fabulous cast, we waive en- 
tirely the recital of them. 

After the sending away of the emis- 
sary goat, the high priest put oiF his 
white vestments, and assuming his 
splendid robes, sacrificed a holocaust 
for himself and the people, and then 
offered another sin-offering. The Jews 
assert that he then went a third time 
into the holy of holies for the purpose 
of bringing away the censer ; but this is 
not certain, as he might have taken it 
when he returned the second time for 
the blood. However this may be, he 



Speak unto Aaron thy brother, that 
he b come not at all times into the 
holy place within the vail, before 
the mercy-seat, which is upon the 
ark ; that he die not : for c I will 

b Exod. 30. 10. ch. 23. 27. Heb. 9. 7, and 
10. 19. c Exod. 25. 22, and 40. 34. 1 Kings 
8. 10, 11, 12. 

proceeded afterwards to wash his hands 
and feet at the laver, after which he 
went to the dressing-chamber, that he 
might lay aside his linen suit, bathe 
himself for the last time, and resume 
his rich official dress, in which to offer 
the evening incense and trim the lamps 
on the golden candlestick. All this 
done, he washed his hands and feet at 
the laver for the last time ; went to the 
dressing-chamber ; laid aside his rich 
attire ; resumed his ordinary wearing 
apparel ; and retired to his own house 
accompanied by the multitude, rejoicing 
that God had not mingled his blood 
with his sacrifice. 

Dii-ecHons to the High Priest as to en- 
tering into the Holy Place. 
2. Speak unto Aaron thy brother that 
he come not at all times into the holy 
place within the vail. That is, v/ithin, 
the vail separating the holy from the 
most holy place, of which see an ac- 
count, Ex. 26. 33. Into the holy place 
without the vail, the officiating priests 
were to enter every day, morning and 
evening, in the performance of their 
functions 5 but they were to know that 
the greatest possible sanctity attached 
to the inner room, and as none of the 
ciDmmon priests were ever to enter this 
apartment at all, so neither was the 
high priest to do it at all times, but only 
on the particular occasion here specified. 
It is generally supposed, however, that 
this rule did not preclude his entrance 
into the holy of holies to consult the 
oracle on extraordinary and pressing 
occasions, which concerned the national 
welfare, as for instance in the case men- 
tioned, Judg. 1. .1,-20. 18. Comp. 



144 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



appear in the cloud upon the 
mercy-seat. 

3 Thus shall Aaron <^come into 
the holy place : e with a young 
bullock for a sin-ofFering, and a ram 
for a burnt-offering. 

4 He shall put on ^ the holy linen 

d Heb. 9. 7, 12, 24, 25. c ch. 4. 3. f Exod. 
28. 39, 42, 43. ch. 6. 10. Ezek. 44. 17, 18. 

Num. 27. 21. This order was given to 
Aaron, not merely in his personal ca- 
pacity, but as the representative of all 
those who should sustain in after ages 

the same office. IT For I icill appeal' 

in the cloud upon the mercy seat. Targ. 
Jon. ' The glory of my Shekinah shall 
be revealed.' The allusion is to the 
bright luminous cloud which took its 
station over the mercy-seat, and between 
the cherubims, and constituted the 
standing symbol of the divine presence. 
Others, however, understand it of the 
cloud of incense mentioned v. 13. But 
this is less likelj'', for in that case we 
might properly ask, what then was to be 
seen? It is plainly a promise that 
something should be made visible on 
the occasion referred to ; and though 
we admit there was a cloud of incense 
filling the inner sanctuary, yet it is de- 
clared that something should be seen 
over the mercy-seat, and what was this 
but the luminous symbol of the divine 
presence ? The cloud of incense would 
no doubt serve to soften the splendor of 
the Shekinah, and make the view toler- 
able to the eyes of the high priest ; and 
it will be observed throughout the 
Scriptures, that the accompaniment of 
a cloud is generally spoken of in con- 
nexion with the manifestation of tlie 
visible divine glory. In like manner, 
when the future coming of Christ, the 
substance of the Shekinah, is announced, 
it is said that he shall come ' in clouds,' 
'in the clouds of heaven,' &c. Dan. 7.13, 
Rev. 1. 7. The note of Rosenmuller on 
the passage before us will be found very 
important. See also Vitringa^s Observ. 
Sac.,]. l.jC. 11. 



coat, and he shall have the linen 
breeches upon his flesh, and shall 
be girded with a linen girdle, and 
with the linen mitre shall he be 
attired: these are holy garments; 
therefore g shall he wash his flesh 
in water, and so put them on. 

g Exod. 30. 20. ch. 8. 6, 7- 



3. Thus shall Aaron come into the 
holy place, &c. Heb. IDlp '^^ i^l'^ 
ycibo el kodeshj which may be rendered, 
approach to the holy, i. e. enter upon or 
engage in the performance of his holy 
duties. At the same time, as the ori- 
ginal word is in many instances applied 
to the tabernacle or temple, it may here 
have that sense, as it was at the taber- 
nacle that these rites were to be per- 
formed. But we are not to understand 
that these offerings were to be brought 
into the holy place, which might pos- 
sibly be inferred from the use of this 
preposition. ' To ' would be a prefera- 
ble rendering of the Heb. '^l^ el. The 
bullock was to be presented as a sin- 
offering for himself, his family, and the 
whole Levitical priesthood. The ram 
for a burnt-offering, to signify that he 
and his associates were wholly conse- 
crated to, and to be wholly employed in, 
the work of the ministry. The cere- 
monies Vv'ith which these two sacrifices 
were accompanied, are detailed in the 
following verses. 

4. He shall put on the holy linen coaty 
&c. Heb. *mp "^ Tuin^ ketoneth bad 
kodesh, the line?i tunic of holiness. Gr. 
'^iTiova \ivovp yjyiaauevovj the sanctified 
linen coat. See this described in the 
Note on Ex. 28. 39. There were eight 
different garments belonging to the altar 
of the high priest, four of v%hich, called 
by the Jews ^ the white garments,' and 
made wholly of linen, are here men- 
tioned as to be worn on this day. The 
remaining four which are mentioned 
Ex. 28. 4, were called ' the golden gar- 
ments,' from there being a mixture of 
sfold in them. Inasmuch as the day of 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVI. 



145 



5 And he shall take of ^ the coa- 
gregation of the children of Israel 
two kids of the goats for a sin-of- 
fering, and one ram for a burnt- 
offeriog. 

6 And Aaron shall offer his bul- 
lock of the sin-oflfering, which is 

h See ch. 4. 14. Numb. 29. 11. 2 Chron. 
29. 21. Ezra 6. 17. Ezek. 45. 22, 23. i ch. 
9. 7. Heb. 6. 2, and 7. 27, 23, and 9. 7. 

atonement was a day of sorrow, hu- 
miliation, and repentancej the high 
priest was not to be clad in his rich 
pontifical robes, but in the simple sa- 
cerdotal vestments which were thought 
to be more appropriate to this occasion. 
Both the priest and the people were to 
be reminded, that when he appeared to 
confess and to expiate their sins and 
his own, he ought to be clothed in the 
garments of humility, for in the charac- 
ter of sinners, the highest and the low- 
est were upon a level before God. These 
garments, however, were to be put oflf 
in the after part of the day, and the or- 
dinary attire of his office resumed, vv. 
23, 24. 

5. He shall take of the congregation 
two kids of the goats. As the former 
sacrifices were for himself, so these 
were for the congregation at large, who 
were hereby significantly taught to re- 
gard themselves as sinners having equal 
need of the benefits of the blood of atone- 
ment to give them acceptance before 
God. 

6. And Aaron shall offer his bullockj 
&c. That is, shall present with a view 
to its being offered, for the actual obla- 
tion is described v. 11. This presenta- 
tion of the victim was accompanied 
with a solemn supplicatory prayer, the 
form of which is given in our prelimi- 
nary remarks. IT And for his house » 

Chal. ^ For the men of his house.' By 
this we are probably to understand not 
merely the private household of the 
priest, but also the whole body of infe- 
rior priests and Levites. 

7. And he shall take the two goats and 

13 



for himself, and i make an atone- 
ment for himself, and for his house. 
7 And he shall take the two goats, 
and present them before the Lord 
at the door of the tabernacle of the 



congregation. 



8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon 
the two goats; one lot for the 
Lord, and the other lot for the 
scape-goat. 



present them, &c. Heb. I'^^i^n he- 
^emid, make to stand. Gr. orjjaet, shall 
station. These goats, the Rabbins say, 
were to be taken from the same flock, 
to be of equal stature, of the same color, 
and of the same value ; in a word, com- 
plete counterparts of each other as far 

as practicable. IT At the door of the 

tabernacle. Within the court-yard, as 
we have previously shown. See Note 
on Lev. 8. 3. 

8, And Aaron shall cast lots upon the 
two goats. According to the Jews, the 
two lots might be either of wood, stone, 
or metal. On one was written for Je- 
hovah, and on the other for the scape- 
goat. They were then put into a vessel, 
while the goats stood with their faces 
to the west. The vessel was then 
shaken, and the priest putting in both 
his hands, brought out a lot in each. 
Being stationed between the two goats, 
the lot which was on his right hand he 
laid upon the goat that was on his 
right ; and that which was in his left 
hand he laid upon the goat that was on 
his left ; and thus according to w^hat 
was written on the lots, the scape goat 
and the goat for sacrifice were deter- 
mined. 

AZAZEL, OR THE SCAPE-GOAT. 

If there be any thing calculated to 
diminish the pleasure or damp the ardor 
of the Biblical expositor in his research- 
es, it is the stern necessity under which 
he sometimes finds himself placed, of 
putting new interpretations upon fa- 
miliar texts. The deeper he penetrates 
into the mine of Scriptural wealth, and 



146 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



the wider the excavation which he 
makes on either hand, the greater is the 
probability of his here and there under- 
mining the adjacent surface and causing 
it occasionally to fall in. But this will 
be little to be regretted if the chasms 
thus made only open new avenues to 
treasures below vastly more precious 
than any which had lain above. Still it 
is always more or less painful to an in- 
genuous mind to disturb, in any degree, 
a ^throned opinion,' even though that 
opinion be founded in error, and he be 
able to substitute in place of it an 
irrefragable truth. Knowing with what 
fond tenacity men cling to their ancient 
and accredited forms of belief, he does 
not like rudely to assail them, and it is 
only a very rampant spirit of innova- 
tion that can take delight in breaking 
up the time-hallowed associations with 
which certain phrases and sentences of 
holy writ uniformly come before the 
mind. Yet it is certain that this result 
is in many cases absolutely inevitable. 
It is the invariable lav\r of human pro- 
gress, whether in the department of 
nature or revelation, that as the light 
breaks forth upon our previous dark- 
ness, new modifications should come 
over established ideas. It would there- 
fore be the height of injustice to ascribe, 
in all cases, to a rage of novelty in 
those who suggest them, the new inter- 
pretations which an advanced state of 
science or philology, or a more extended 
and critical inter-collation of passages, 
may force upon their convictions. It is 
to be remembered that they too have 
known what it is to be wedded to favor- 
ite interpretations, and can tell of the 
struggle which it cost them to give 
them up. But they yielded to the force 
of evidence, and embraced the views 
which, it may be, they at first strenu- 
ously withstood. If then they become 
the patrons of these views, and with all 
the requisite array of learning and logic, 
endeavor to make good their access to 
other minds, let it be presumed it is 
not owing merely to a prurient prompt- 



ing to obtrude a novel exposition upon 
the mind of the Christian community, 
but to the stern behests of the spirit of 
homage to truth, which will not let 
them forbear to utter what they sin- 
cerely and solemnly believe to be the 
sense of revelation. 

These remarks will no doubt be per- 
ceived to have a direct and prominent 
bearing upon the task which we have 
imposed upon ourselves, in the some- 
what elaborate investigation of the sub- 
ject which now comes before us. — 
The typical institution of the Scape- 
goat is one of the most striking features 
of the Levitical system, and its import 
as a symbol has been so long rested in 
as shadowing forth the grand doctrine 
of the economical transfer of sin and 
guilt from believers to Christ, that one 
would almost as soon think of doubting 
the fact of such a ceremony, as of call- 
ing in question the established sense 
which common theological consent has 
attached to it. Indeed, it has been re- 
marked, that while other types receive 
light from their accomplishment in 
Christ, this is intrinsically so apt, so 
felicitous, so obvious, that it reflects 
light upon the gospel itself. The im- 
position of hands and the confession of 
sins on the head of the emissary goat, 
and his subsequent discharge and escape 
into the wilderness, seem to afford so 
fit an emblem of the bearing and carry- 
ing away of the sins of believers by the 
substituted divine victim, that it would 
appear to be no less a violence done to 
the pious sentiments, than to the pon- 
dering reason, of the Christian, to at- 
tempt to divert the spiritual application 
of the symbol to any other subject. But 
fealty to truth must predominate over 
every other sentiment in the bosom of 
the humble disciple of revelation. Un- 
der its guidance we are to shrink from jy 
no results to which we are legitimately Y 
brought. And in this spirit of supreme 
deference to the dictates of truth, we 
would enter upon the critical exposition 
of the passage before us. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVI. 



147 



The following is the correct rendering 
of the verse : — ' And Aaron shall cast 
lots upon the two goats ; one lot Hin'^J) 
lai-hovahjfor Jehovah, and the other lot 
J;ti<t5>ii la-azazel, for Azazel.^ The 
goat on which the lot of Jehovah fell 
was to be brought and offered up for a 
sin-oiFering, but the goat on which the 
lot of Azazel fell was to be ' presented 
alive before Jehovah to make an atone- 
ment with him (I'^^S? alauv, upon or 
over him), to let it go for Azazel into 
the wilderness.' Of the former, the 
blood was to be carried within the vail, 
and to be sprinkled upon the mercy- 
seat, and before the mercy-seat, in order 
that atonement might be made for the 
holy place because of the uncleanness 
of the children of Israel. When on the 
other hand the live goat was brought, 
the high priest was to lay both his 
hands upon its head and to confess over 
it all the iniquities of the children of 
Israel, putting them upon the head of 
the goat ; after which he was to send it 
by the hand of a ^ fit man' C^t)^ l!5'i^ 
ish itti) that it might bear upon it all 
their iniquities into a land not inhabited. 

Such was the ceremony, and we are 
now to endeavor to ascertain its typical 
or symbolical scope, and especially 
what is to be understood by the differ- 
ent treatment of the two goats. But in 
order to do this, we must in the outset 
institute a careful inquiry into the 
meaning of the remarkable term ' Aza- 
zel,' which occurs in this connexion for 
the first and last time, and on the true 
sense of which it is evident that every 
thing depends. 

Etymology and Meaning of the term 
Azazel. 
To the eye of the Hebrew scholar, 
this word presents itself at once as a 
compound, but its constituent elements, 
and consequently its true significancy, 
have long been the theme of learned 
debate. Nearly every critical com- 
mentator opens his peculiar scholium 
upon the text, with a kind of preliminary 



groan of ^ locus vexatissimus V and 
some are disposed to give it up in de- 
spair. Bochart, whose stupendous eru- 
dition is seldom bafiled by the most 
formidable difficulties, is here forced to 
the humble confession — ' Me de hac 
voce 5t5<Tj^ Azazel nihil habere satis 
ciixi\xm, I have nothing certain to offer 
in regard to this word j' and moreover 
that — ' prudentiores vocem Hebrseam 
relinquunt diepjjievcvTov,' the more pru- 
dent leave the Hebrew word uninter- 
preted. Under these circumstances it 
can be little discredit for one to fail of 
entire success in his attempts to illus- 
trate the genuine import of the term. 
The failure of our predecessors affords 
us a kind of testudinal panoply against 
the shame of a like result. 

We shall first state the principal ex- 
planations which have been given of the 
term. 

I. Several of the Rabbinical writers, 
including the Targumists, understand 
by pTi^t^ Azazel, the name of the place 
to which the scape-goat was conducted. 
Thus Jonathan, in his Targum on v. 10 
of this chapter, renders the last clause 
— * to send him away to death in a rough 
and rocky place in the desert of Tsuk.' 
Here it was supposed by the Talmud- 
ists, that the goat was thrown down a 
steep precipice of the mountain called 
Azazel, and dashed to pieces. (Light- 
foot Temp. Ser. p. 177, vol. IX. Pitman's 
Ed.) This is favored by the Arabic 
versions which have for the Hebrew 
^tJj^T5!'i to Azazel, every where ^^^^ 
1^1^ ^^ legebel al-azaz, to the Mount 
Azaz, or to the rough mountain, as 
azaz properly signifies. And to give 
still more color to this interpretation, 
R. Saadias Gaon supposes the word to 
be compounded of Jjj^ el and tt5> azaz, 
so that the mountain ^t^t5? Azazel, is 
by transposition equivalent to Jfi<tt5? 
Azzael, i. e. 7'ough mountain of God, 
just as David, Ps. 36. 7, speaks of lofty 
mountains, as ^ mountains of God.' But 
to say nothing of the license of altera- 
tion which appears in these readings. 



148 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



we find no intimation of any mountain 
thus denominated, either in Palestine or 
out of it, to which the scape-goat was 
led. We are simply informed that the 
animal was to be conveyed into the 
wilderness, without any specification 
of the place. Besides, had Moses in- 
tended to have designated a particular 
mountain, he would doubtless have em- 
ployed the common adjection ' Mount,' 
and we should have had ' Mount Aza- 
zeP just as we now have ' Mount Horeb,' 
< Mount Ebal,' 'Mount Gerizim,' &c. 
Rejecting this interpretation therefore 
as untenable, we come upon another 
which unites the suffrages of a large 
class of the more modern commentators. 
II. This supposes that the term '^1^1^ 
Azazel is the name, not of a momitain 
or place, but of the scape-goat itself. 
This, it is contended, is obvious from 
the structure of the word, taken in con- 
nexion with the structure of the sen- 
tence : — ' Aaron shall cast lots upon the 
two goats, one lot for the Lord,' i. e. 
for the goat which was to be sacrificed 
to the Lord : ' and the other lot for 
Azazel,^ i. e. for the goat which was to 
be sent away into the wilderness. The 
word itself, it is maintained, is easily 
and legitimately resolved into 1^ ez, a 
goat, and "^1^ dzal, to go away, to de- 
part, which gives us the exact idea of 
the ceremonial use of the scape-goat, 
viz., that of being formally sent away 
into the wilderness. The rendering of 
several of the ancient versions gives, it 
is said, not a little confirmation to this 
sense of the term. Symmachus has for 
' Azazel,* rpayog airep'xonevos, the depart- 
ing goat; Aquila rpayog dno'Se^vixevo?, the 
goat set free or let loose ; and the Sept. 
dTTorofjiTraTos, which Theodoret and 
some other of the Greek fathers inter- 
pret as equivalent to dnoTreixnonevos, sent 
away. But as we shall show in the se- 
quel that there is great reason to ques- 
tion the correctness of this interpreta- 
tion, the rendering of the lxx must be 
taken here as important rather for the 
sense which has been put upon it, than 



for its own direct and positive testimony 
to the meaning of the Hebrew original. 

The terms, however, above quoted, 
are freely used by the ancient Greek 
writers, Theodoret, Cyril of Alexandria, 
and others, in reference to the same 
subject, and the Latin vulgate accords 
with them by adopting the rendering, 
' hircus emissarius,' the emissary goat. 
Guided by the same authorities, our 
translators have rendered the original 
by ' scape-goat.' But to this view of 
the origin and import of the Hebrew 
term, it must be admitted that there are 
serious objections, among which are the 
following. 

(1.) It does not appear why such a 
singular and anomalous terni should 
have been employed to express an idea 
so simple as that of a goat sent away. 
The Hebrew has an appropriate word 
for the subject, viz., t3> ez, or ^^5>1D 
sdir, goat, and another )r\^lDl2 meshul- 
Wh, from tl^lD shdWh, to dismiss, or 
send away, for the predicate. Why 
then should such a strange compound 
word be introduced in this connexion, 
especially when it is well known, that 
although, in Hebrew, proper names are 
often compounded, yet appellatives very 
seldom are ? The presumption, from 
the genius of the language, is most un- 
questionably in favor of ' Azazel's ' j 
being a proper name. The force of 
this objection is greatly enhanced by ' 
the fact, that neither Onkelos, Jona- 
than, nor the Samaritan, have attempt- 
ed to translate or paraphrase the term, 
which they undoubtedly would have 
done, had they considered it merely as 
an appellative. 

(2.) It is objected to this explication 
by Bochart, that it involves a gramma- 
tical anomaly. Each of the goats was 
obviously required to be a male; but 
T5> ez, in the sense of goaf, more appro- 
priately signifies a female ; and yet it 
is here represented as compounded with 
the masculine "^1^ azal. We do not 
indeed consider this objection as insu- 
perable, as there is some reason to rank 



B. C. 1490.] 



52^ ez among the epicene or hermaphro- 
dite nouns ; but we may still say that 
we should more naturally have expected, 
that for the purpose intended, the unam- 
biguous iTi<^'^2'''J Se'irazel would have 
been employed, especially as tD^'^S'liD 
Se'irim, is used in speaking of the two 
goats in the words immediately pre- 
ceding. 

(3.) But a far more serious difficulty 
incumbers the proposed interpretation, 
from the structure of the sentence. The 
direction in the text is thus worded: — 
' One lot shall be n^in*^^ for Jehovahy 
and the other lot fc^Vi^t^''^ for AzazeW 
Now the obvious impression on reading 
this would be, that a personal antithesis 
was intended. Jehovah certainly, the 
first party, is a person ; and as precisely 
the same formula of expression occurs 
in regard to the other, why should we 
not consider that also as a person ? But 
according to the present rendering, the 
preposition '^for^ in the two successive 
clauses, is made to bear two entirely 
different significations. In the former 
it denotes toj in the sense of appropria- 
tion — in the latter it denotes /or, in the 
sense of designation to a particular 
purpose. Is this probable? Indeed, 
we see not why, if ^ Azazel ^ is to be 
understood as the name of one goat, 
^ Jehovah ' is not as properly to be un- 
derstood as the name of the other. But 
from this alternative the mind instinc- 
tively shrinks back. 

As then the objection to this theory 
of the derivation and meaning of the 
word appears to be sufficiently valid to 
warrant its rejection ; and as we seem 
forced, at the same time, to adopt only 
such an exposition as shall assume the 
personality of the ' Azazel ' of the text, 
the question at once arises, what person 
can w^e suppose to be intended by the 
appellation ? This is indeed a question 
of very grave import, and we feel a 
strong necessity laid upon us of making 
peace with the pre-possessions of our 
readers, when we announce our firm 



CHAPTER XVI. 

being, but 



149 



ginary, is signified 



conviction, that not 



only 



a personal 
13* 



an evil demon, real or ima- 
by this unique and 
anomalous term. 

In presenting our purposed array of 
authorities in support of this opinion, 
we begin with the translation of the 
Seventy. The words of our English 
version, ' One lot for the Lord and the 
other lot for the scape-goat,' they have 
thus rendered : — Kkripov cva tm Kvplca 
KtxL KXrjpov eva re-} dT:o~ojX7:aLO), one lot tO 
the Lord J and one lot to the Apopom- 
pens, or sender-away. The Greek word 
dTro-o<j-a7ogj though rendered passively 
in our translation, and so understood 
and interpreted by several of the early 
fathers, yet according to the analogy of 
the language, and doubtless according 
to the intention of the versionists, is 
properly a term of active signification. 
The reader has onlj'^ to turn to the learn- 
ed pages of Bochart to see this point 
established beyond a doubt. (Hieroz, 
P. I. L. II. c. 54. T. I. p. 745-7.) In 
this sense it is held by many critics of 
distinguished name to import one of 
that class of demons or deities who 
were called by the Latins Dii AverruU' 
ci, or the deities who send away or avert 
evils from their votaries^ which was 
done through the propitiating agency 
of prayers, sacrifices, and other offer- 
ings. This is confirmed by Gesenius, 
from whose Hebrew Lexicon we ex- 
tract, in this connexion, what he says 
on the word pti^T5> Azazel : * I render 
it without hesitation the averter, eX' 
piator^ averruncuSf dXs'^lKaKos^ i. e. for 
Ptpt5? Azalzelj from the root ^15? azalj 
to remove, to separate. By this name I 
suppose is to be understood originally 
some idol that was appeased with sacri- 
fices, as Saturn and Mars ; but after- 
wards, as the names of idols were often 
transferred to demons, it seems to de- 
note an evil demon dwelling in the 
desert, and to be placated with victims, 
in accordance with this very ancient 
and also Gentile rite. The name Aza- 
zel is also used by the Arabs for an evil 
demon. (See E,eland de Relig. Mohani. 



150 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



p. 189. Meninski,h. V.) The etymol- 
ogy which we have above proposed, was 
expressed of old by the Sept. translator, 
although neglected or misunderstood by 
most interpreters. Thus he renders it v. 

8, TO) ' ATTOTTO^tTrarfo, i. e. ' A-TTOrpOTTaTM. 

^ A.\£^LKaK(o, averrunco 'j v. 10, ds rf]v 
diTOTroixfiv ad averruncundum ; v. 16, 
£1? acpeaiv. The ecclesiastical fathers 
have referred this ' AiroTTonnaLog to the 
goat itself, q. d. scape-goat^ although 
obviously in v. 8 the antithesis lies be- 
tween StJi^tS^i and nin'^i.' That 
dTOTToixTTaios IS ludced of the active in- 
stead of passive signification, not only 
has Bochart clearly proved by a long 
list of classic citations, but the words 
of Josephus in reference to this rite 
throw a strong light on this sense of 
the Sept. rendering : ^ The goat is sent 
away into a remote desert as an averter 
of ills (ixTTOTpoTnaaiJios)} and a satisfac- 
tion for the sins of the people.' (An- 
tiq. Jud. L. III. c. 10.) 

It is clear then, we think, both that 
the Lxx esteemed the * AzazeP a per- 
son, and that they supposed that person 
to be a demon, or deity of the order of 
* Averrunci,' or averters. That the 
same opinion was held by the early 
Christians, we seem to have clear proof 
from the words of Origen, who, in at- 
tempting to show that the devil was 
known in the times of Moses, says 
among other things, ^ He who is called 
in Leviticus dTroTro^wTraro?, and whom the 
Hebrew Scriptures call Azazel, was no 
other than the devil.' The same con- 
clusion was drawn from this language 
by the apostate emperor Julian, who 
maintained that since Moses speaks of 
the devotement of a goat to a deity called 
dTTOTTo/aTrtuos in contradistinction from 
Jehovah, he in efi'ect taught the very 
same doctrine as that inculcated by the 
heathen theologists respecting the Dii 
Averrunci. He was answered at length 
hy Cyril of Alexandria, but we are not 
concerned with the arguments of either, 
any farther than as they serve as testi- 
monies to the fact of an early belief in 



the Christian church that ' Azazel ' in 
the Pentateuch was the name of an evil 
demon. That this belief is to be traced 
to the demonology of the Jews, we 
think there can be no doubt. Rabbi 
Menahem in his commentary on Leviti- 
cus, says that Azazel was one of the 
four principal demons whose names he 
writes together as follows : Sammael, 
Azazel, Azael, and Mahazael. In like 
manner the apocryphal book of Enoch 
makes mention of Azalel, or as it was 
afterwards written, Azael, among the 
fallen angels. The same is affirmed in 
the Rabbinical work entitled Zohar. 
Mercer in his commentary on Genesis 
relates as a traditional dogma of the 
Cabalists, that demons and all kinds of 
malignant spirits were prone to dwell 
in burial places and solitudes, and that 
Azazel was the name of one of this 
class of beings. Nor are we to forget 
that the New Testament allusions make 
it evident, that in the popular belief of 
the Jews the deserts and desolate places 
were the chosen haunts of these foul 
fiends. Our Lord underwent his tempt- 
ation from the devil in the wilderness, 
and it was hither that the legion of evil 
demons is said to have driven the pos- 
sessed man ere they were ejected from 
him by the word of Christ. It is, more- 
over, through dry and desert places that 
the unclean spirit is represented by the 
Savior as walking after he had quitted 
the body of the demoniac. It goes also 
strikingly to confirm this view of the 
subject, that those desert-deities were 
generally conceived of as having the 
semblance of goats, or rough, hairy, 
shaggy creatures, corresponding with 
the Satyrs of the Greek and Roman 
mythology, which were sylvan deities 
or demigods, represented as monsters, 
half man and half goat, having horns on 
their heads, hairy bodies, with the feet 
and tail of the goat. Thus the prophet 
Isaiah in predicting the ruin of Babylon, 
says, ch. 13. 21, ^ Wild beasts of the 
desert shall lie there, and their houses 
shall be full of doleful creatures, and 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVI. 



151 



owls shall dwell there, and satyrs 
(D*i'i5'^t5 Seh'im, goats) shall dance 
there ;' where the Gr. has Saijxdviaj de- 
mons ; the Vulg. ' Pilosi,' shaggy or 
hairy animals ; and the Chal. ' Demons.' 
The popular ideas of the external form 
and appearance of the devil among the 
rude and ignorant of nearly all nations, 
both ancient and modern, easily connect 
themselves with these early traditions, 
and the language of holy writ in the 
following passage goes clearly to evince 
the origin of the vulgar associations. 
Lev. 17. 7, ' And they shall no more 
offer their sacrifices unto devils (S^*^5''1D 
Hi. goats) after whom,' &c. 2 Chron. 
11,15, 'And he ordained him priests 
for the high places, and for the devils 
('0'1^'^'ID goats) and for the calves which 
he had made.' On the peculiar usage 
of the original term, Kimchi in his Lex- 
icon (voc. "n^S^'H) Sa'ir) remarks, ' They 
(demons) are called goats, because they 
appear in the shape of goats to their 
votaries.' It would seem then that 
there are good grounds for recognizing 
in this term a designed allusion to some 
kind of desert-demon to whom the sec- 
ond goat was in a manner dedicated, 
devoted, or consigned, but not sacrificed, 
as this would be a direct contravention 
of the precept just quoted from Lev. 
17. 7, * They shall no more offer their 
sacrifices unto devils.' 

Still the grand question remains to 
be solved, why the goat w^as consigned 
or devoted at all to Azazel ? The Rab- 
i bins, who for the most part understand 
Azazel to mean the evil spirit, have 
advanced some singular notions on this 
subject. Substituting the name Sam- 
mael for Azazel, R. Eliezer scruples 
not to say, that they offer a gift to 
Sammael, or Satan, on the day of atone- 
ment, lest he should make their obla- 
tions fruitless. Indeed, we are told 
that it became a current proverb among 
the Hebrews, < A gift to Sammael on 
the day of atonement.' The idolatrous 
character of this offering, Moses Gerun- 
dinensis endeavors, indeed, to explain 



away, but still in such terms as assure 
us of the fact : — ' Our intention when 
we let loose the goat, is not to present 
him as an oblation to Sammael. God 
forbid ! — but our desire is to do the will 
of our Creator, who has delivered to us 
such a commandment.' What is yet 
stranger, some of the more ancient 
Christians, who used the Greek transla- 
tion of the Seventy, v/ere thence led to 
imagine that ' of the two goats, one was 
sacrificed to God, and the other was sent 
into the desert to propitiate an evil and 
impure demon, thus venerated as an 
apopompean spirit.' For this impiety 
they are deservedly censured by Cyril 
and Procopius j and it is well remarked 
by Abulensis, that ^ the goat was not 
sacrificed to the demon Azazel, for it is 
only said that it was conveyed into the 
desert ; for it were a great disgrace to 
the God of the Hebrews, if he could not 
deliver his worshippers from demons, 
and if they were compelled to propitiate 
the devil lest he should hurt them..' 
And in this connexion we may advert 
to the opinion of Spencer, (De Legib. 
Heb. L. iii. Dissert, viii. p. 1040), who 
takes the name ' Azazel,' as compound- 
ed of 1^ az, strong, and ^ti< azal^ to 
depart ^ implying the strong receder^ 
or powerful apostate, an appropriate 
denomination, he supposes, of the devil 
as the arch rebel and revolter ; to which 
may be added, that he and other beings 
of his class were prone, according to 
popular estimation, to withdraw them- 
selves from all frequented places, and 
hover about dreary solitudes, tombs, 
ruins, and deserts. The reasons which 
he assigns for the extraordinary rite of 
the consignment of the goat to Azazel, 
are the three following: (1.) That the 
animal thus laden with the sins of the 
people and delivered up to the demon, 
might denote the wretched lot of all 
sinners. (2.) That the dedication of 
this goat thus circumstanced to an evil 
demon might serve to show the Israel- 
ites the impurity of apostate spirits, and 
so divert and lake them off, and others 



152 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



also, from all proneness to hold inter- 
course with such beings. (3.) That 
since their sins were sufficiently ex- 
piated by the piacular goat sent out to 
Azazel, they might more willingly ab- 
stain from all application to the apo- 
pompean gods of the Gentiles. 

These reasons, though free from the 
absurd impiety of the Rabbinical super- 
stition, strike the sober mind as at once 
far-fetched and fanciful, and we are shut 
up to the necessity of seeking for a 
more satisfactory solution of the prob- 
lem. In attempting this, let us recur 
again to the incidents mentioned in the 
text as connected with this singular 
transaction. V, 9, 10: 'And Aaron 
shall bring the goat upon which the 
Lord's lot fell, and offer him for a sin- 
offering. But the goat on which the lot 
fell for Azazel, shall be presented alive 
before the Lord, to make an atonement 
with him (1^^3^ "^S^^ lekappcr alauv, 
to expiate or atone over or upon him,) 
to let him go for Azazel into the wil- 
derness.^ And then again, after de- 
scribing the ceremonies of the slain- 
goat, he adds, v. 21, 22, ' He shall bring 
the live goat, and Aaron shall lay both 
his hands upon the head of the live goat, 
and confess over him all the iniquities 
of the children of Israel, and all their 
transgressions in all their sins, putting 
them upon the head of the goat, and 
shall send him away by the hand of a 
fit man into the wilderness: and the 
goat shall bear upon him all their in- 
iquities unto a land not inhabited : and 
he shall let go the goat into the wilder- 
ness.' 

Typical Import of the Scape-Goat. 

The common interpretation given by 
divines of this typical rite — an interpre- 
tation built for the most part on the 
presumption that * Azazel ' was the 
name of the scape-goat, is substantially 
this : — The two goats constituted in fact 
but one offering, having a direct typical 
reference to Christ, who laid down his 
life for us in the character of a sacrificial 



victim, and to whom the load of our 
iniquities was transferred by imputa- 
tion. But Christ is contemplated in 
this type in a two-fold aspect, one as 
dying for our sins, the other as rising 
again for our justification. But to this 
two-fold phasis of the mediatorial work 
of Christ, no single offering could suit- 
ably correspond. A double oblation, it 
is supposed, was made necessary by the 
very nature of the case. One goat slain 
could only show us a sacrificed Savior ; 
it could not show us a living Savior. 
One could not exhibit him ' who liveth 
and was dead, and is alive forevermore.' 
There must be two to convey the great 
truth, that Christ was 'put to death in 
the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit ;' 
that ' he was delivered for our offences, 
and raised again for our justification ;' 
that ' he was crucified through weak- 
ness, and yet liveth by the power of j 
God.' All this, it is held, is significantly 9 
taught by the two-fold symbol of the 
slain and the emissary goat, the one 
designed as a vicarious sacrifice for siuj 
the other as a living memorial of its 
benign effects. In the latter we see the 
sins of believers carried away, and re- 
moved from them as far as the east is 
from the west j in a word, as lost, blot- 
ted out, extinguished forever from the 
divine remembrance. ^ 

This view of the typical purport of 
the rite before us is very ancient, hav« 
ing been held by Theodoret, Cyril, Au- 
gustin, and Procopius, and while inge- 
nious and plausible in itself, it does not, 
that we are aware, go counter to the 
general genius of the Mosaic economy, 
distinguished, as it was, by a vast and 
unspeakable richness of symbolical 
imagery. At the same time, we cannot 
but suggest, that this explanation labors 
under a liability to two objections of 
considerable weight. (1.) The sins of 
Israel, in the typical ceremony, were 
laid upon the head of the live goat, 
which was then, as a figure of the risen, 
justified, and justifying Savior, to be 
sent away into the wilderness. But 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVL 



153 



how does this correspond with the facts 
in regard to the Antitype. Christ bore 
the sins of men, not as rising, but as 
dying. He rose from the dead, and en- 
tered into glory ' without sin ;' nor do 
we any where learn that he continues 
after his death to sustain the same ex- 
piatory office that he did at his death. 
On the contrary, we are assured that he 
was ' once offered to bear the sins of 
many ;' and that ' by this one offering 
he hath forever perfected them that be- 
lieve.' (2.) We learn from v. 26, that 
' he that let go the goat for Azazel was 
to wash his clothes and bathe his flesh 
in water, and afterwards come into the 
camp.' From this it appears, that con- 
tact with the goat made the person who 
handled him, even for the purpose of 
sending him away, unclean. This was 
in consequence of the sins with which 
the scape-goat was putatively charged 
and loaded previous to his dismission. 
But as no uncleanness can be supposed 
to attach to Christ subsequent to his 
resurrection, it is difficult to conceive 
how any ceremonial taint should cleave 
to his representing symbol. 

Influenced by these and other consid- 
erations, and dissenting moreover, from 
the opinion that * Azazel ' was the name 
of the goat, Faber, following the foot- 
steps of Witsius, has propounded the 
following solution of the spiritual pur- 
port of the rite. (Hor. Mos. vol. ii. p. 
259, Comp. Witsius on the Covenants, 
vol. ii. p. 230.) * Christ,' he remarks, 
^ laid down his life for us that we might 
go free ; and this sacrifice of himself 
upon the cross, was typified by every 
bloody sacrifice under the Law, and 
therefore, among others, by the piacular 
devotement of that goat, which fell by 
lot to Jehovah. Here we have the great 
mystery of the gospel, so well described 
by the apostle, as that which could 
alone exhibit God both just and yet the 
justifier of them that believe in Christ 
Jesus. But this is not the whole of our 
Lord's character. At the very com- 
mencement of the Bible, it was foretold 



that, although the promised seed of the 
woman shall finally bruise the head of 
the serpent, yet the serpent should first 
bruise his heel or mortal part. If then 
the serpent was to bruise his mortal 
part, that mortal part must needs be 
delivered over to the power of the ser- 
pent ; for of himself, he could possess 
no such superiority, even during a single 
moment. Hence it will follow, that 
Satan, bent only on satiating his own 
malice, and unconscious that he was 
actually subserving the divine purposes 
of mercy, was the agent who, through 
his earthly tools effected the death of 

the Messiah Such being the 

Scriptural character of our Lord, it is 
evident that no single type can perfectly 
exhibit it in both its parts. The various 
bloody sacrifices of the Law prefigured 
it in one part, viz., that which respected 
the atonement made with God for the 
sins of man ; but they spoke nothing 
concerning its other part, viz., that 
which respected the delivering up of 
the Messiah to the infernal serpent, 
with the permissive power of bruising 
his mortal frame. On this second part 
they were silent 5 and if it were at all 
to be shadowed out under the ceremo- 
nial law, such a purpose could only be 
effected by the introduction of a new 
type, connected indeed with the usual 
sacrificial type, but kept nevertheless 
studiously distinct from it. A double 
type, in short, must be employed, if the 
character of Christ under its two-fold 
aspect was to be completely prefigured. 
Now the two goats, which are jointly 
denominated a sin-offering, (Lev. 
16. 5,) constitute a type of this iden- 
tical description. The two together 
present us v/ith a perfect symbolical 
delineation of our Lord's official char- 
acter, while he was accomplishing the 
great work of our redemption. The 
goat which fell to the lot of Jehovah 
was devoted as a sin-offering, after the 
manner of any other sin-offering, by its 
being piacularly slain. This type re- 
presented the Messiah in the act of 



154 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



satisfying the strict justice of God, by 
consenting to lay down his life sacri- 
ficially in our stead, and on our behalf. 
But the goat which fell to the lot of 
Azazel was first imputatively loaded 
with the sins of the whole people, and 
was then symbolically given up to the 
rage of the evil spirit, by being turned 
loose into the wilderness, which was 
deenned his favorite terrestrial haunt. 
This second type represented the Mes- 
siah burdened with the transgressions 
of all mankind, deserted for a season by 
his heavenly Father, and delivered into 
the hand of the prince of darkness, with 
a full permission granted to the apos- 
tate angel, of mortally bruising his heel 
or human nature. Such I conceive to 
be the plain and obvious interpretation 
of the ceremonial which was observed 
ill the great day of atonement. Yet 
from a part of the ordinance respecting 
the live goat, I think it not improbable 
that a special previsionary regard may 
have been mysteriously had to a very 
remarkable part of our Savior's history. 
When the goat was delivered up to the 
malice of Satan, it was turned loose 
into the wilderness. In a similar man- 
ner, * Jesus was led up of the Spirit 
into the wilderness, to be tempted of 
the devil' (Matt. 4. 1) ; and here, when 
he had fasted forty days, and was after- 
wards an hungered, the fiend commenced 
upon him that series of attacks which 
terminated only with his death upon 
the cross. Thus perfect throughout is 
the similitude between the type and the 
antitype.' 

This view we submit to the reader 
for what he may deem it worth. If we 
had not what we esteem a still better 
solution to propose, we should be in- 
clined to adopt it, at least in preference 
to the common and accredited mode of 
explication. But we think we can point 
out ' a more excellent way ' of solving 
the mystery of the scape-goat, and to 
this we now invite attention, simply 
premising that a hint contained in a 
quotation from the old commentator, 



Conrad Pellican, whose own work we 
have never seen, contains the germ of 
the exposition, which we have expanded 
to much fuller dimensions, and sustain- '^ 
ed by a new array of evidence, in the 
remarks that follow% 

It is evident, that in making out the 
proof that ' Azazel ' signifies something 
else than the scape-goat itself, a new 
complexion is given at once to the 
whole passage. If the falling of the 
lot to Azazel indicated the consignment 
of the emissary goat to some real or 
imaginary spirit of evil, then it is pal- 
pable that a typical or symbolical scope 
entirely different from the common one 
must be recognized in the ceremony. 
We do not perceive in what sense, or 
with what propriety, an animal could 
be dedicated to Satan, and still be con- 
sidered as a type of Christ. * Satan 
Cometh, and hath nothing in me,' said 
the Savior himself when on earth, and 
we cannot but ask, on what ground a 
typical rite is to be referred to Him, 
the direct and prominent import of 
which expressed a peculiar appropria- 
tion to Satan, as of something to which 
he had an acknowledged and paramount 
right. Surely no one can be insensible 
to the incongruity which reigns through- 
out the whole transaction, viewed in 
this light. However plausible the argu- 
ments in favor of such an interpretation, 
we shrink instinctively from it as de- 
rogatory to the pure and sinless nature, 
and the holy designation of Jesus. 
Whatever else might have been shadow- 
ed forth by this institute of the Jewish 
law, we are sure that we are not to look 
for a prefiguration of Him who was 
dedicated as a divine Deodand to God, 
in a goat set apart by mystic ceremo- 
nies to the devil. 

What, then, are we to understand by 
this significant item in the ordinances 
of the great day of atonement ? Some- 
thing of a symbolical character all will 
admit in the dismission of the goat, 
loaded with sin, into the wilderness. 
Whatever the implication may be, the 



B. a 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVL 



155 



ceremony itself cannot, we think, ini- 
ply that the animal, considered in its 
emblematic character, was regarded by 
Gk)d as acceptable, or looked upon with 
a complacent eye, but rather the reverse. 
It was something which was put away 
as from a feelingr of aversion, while on I 
the contrary, the other goat was retam- 
ed, and, when turned into a sacrificial 
oflering, came up before the Lord as a 
sweet-scented savor. This utterly di- 
verse treatment and disposal of the two 
animals, compels us to recognize in 
each an antitypical substance, which 
was to meet with corresponding enter- 
tainm.ent at the hands of Jehovah. The 
one victim pointed to a substance which 
was to be pre-eminently well pleasing 
to him ; the other, one from which he 
would turn away with displacency and 
loathing. The former plainly received 
its realization in Christ, the beloved 
Son, in whom his soul delighted ; the 
latter must be accomplished in some- 
thing which, in comparison, he abhors. 
In looking around for an object which 
shall answer these conditions, v\^e know 
of none that so fully and so fairly meets 
the demand as the Jewish people them- 
selves. It is here, if we mistake not, in 
the apostate, derelict, and reprobate 
race of Israel, rejected (not irrevocably) 
for their rejection of the Messiah, that 
we behold the substantiated truth of the 
shadow before us. 

Certain it is that this signal event of 
the judicial rejection of the covenant 
people, was in the prescience of Jeho- 
vah ages before it occurred, and we see 
nothing incongruous in the idea, that it 
might have been mystically fore-shown 
hy some appropriate rite in the ancient 
economy. And if this be granted, what 
occasion more suitable for the exhibition 
of this rite, than that of the great na- 
tional festival of expiation, in which 
the atoning death of the divine substi- 
tute for sinners was most significantly 
set forth ? This day was replete with 
solemn prognostics of that still more 
momentous day when Christ, the true 



victim, should make his soul an offering 
for sin ; and we well know that it was 
in putting the Messiah to death on that 
occasion, that that wicked nation were 
so to concentrate and consummate their 
guilt as to necessitate, to the divine 
counsels, their exclusion from the pale 
of the covenant, at least for a long lapse 
of centuries. We may indeed admit 
that such a typical intimation would be 
very apt to be in its own nature obscure. 
It would be one of peculiarly latent 
meaning for the time then being, for the 
people would be slow to read the sen- 
tence of their own rejection in any of 
the national rites, and in order that it 
might not be read, it was doubtless de- 
signedly shrouded in a veil not easily 
penetrated, and couched in an action so 
closely connected with another of dif- 
ferent import, that it was in itself easily 
susceptible of a construction apparently 
sound, yet really fallacious and false. 

We are well aware that it may be 
objected to this mode of viewing the 
transaction, that the sins of the con- 
gregation were, by putative transfer, 
laid upon the head of the emissary goat, 
as their appointed substitute, in whose 
dwmission they were to find remission. 
The language, moreover, Avould seem 
to be peculiarly express to this effect, 
when it is said that the scape-goat should 
be ' presented alive before the Lord, to 
make an atonement with him, to let 
him go for Azazel into the wilderness.' 
How then does this comport with the 
idea of the Jewish people being the 
substance of the type in question? 
Does it not follow that they were them- 
selves the victim of expiation for their 
own sins, instead of their sins being 
laid upon Christ, the grand propitiation 
for the sins of the world ? We answer, 
undoubtedly it does. This, in fact, we 
conceive to be the very aim and drift of 
the ceremony before us, viz., to intimate 
that the guilty race were to ' bear their 
iniquity,' that they were, upon their 
rejection of the Messiah, to be sent 
forth into the wilderness of the world, 



156 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



scattered over the broad surface of the 

earth, and after being loaded with the 
guilt of that blood which they impre- 
cated upon their own and the heads of 
their children, to be delivered over to 
the dominion of darkness, of which Sa- 
tan, under the mystic denomination of 
Azazel, was the reputed prince and po- 
tentate. This we are certain was the 
fact in regard to the great body of the 
outcast nation of Israel according to 
the flesh, and as before remarked, we 
see no grounds to question that an event 
of so much moment should have been 
darkly, yet significantly, shadowed 
forth in the typical ordinances of that 
solemn day which celebrated prospect- 
ively the events of the atonement. Nor 
do we read any insuperable objection 
to this in the language of the institute 
itself; ^ to make an atonement with 
himj and to let him go for a scape-goat 
(to or for Azazel) into the wilderness.' 
We have already intimated that the 
original 1*^j5^ '^iDlD^ lekapper dlauv, 
properly imports, to make an atonement 
over, upon, or for him, instead of with 
or by him, instrumentally, as rendered 
in our translation. The goat in this 
act w^as plainly considered as the sub- 
ject, and not the 7nedium, of atonement 
or reconciliation. The interposition of 
the particle "^^ is extremely common 
after the verb I&ID kaphar, to denote 
the object of expiation or pacification, 
expressed by that Hebrew term. Thus, 
Lev. 4. 20, ' And the priest shall make 
an atonement for them (DH^S? 15lD kip- 
per alehem), and it shall be forgiven 
them,^ i. e. the congregation. So also 
in V. 18 of this chapter : — ' And he shall 
go out unto the altar that is before the 
Lord, and make an atonement for it, 
(I'^^Si' 'IS^ kipper dlauv).^ So again, 
V. 30 — ^ For on that day shall the priest 
make an atonement for you ('l&lD'^ 
ti'^)D5> yckapper al'ekem).^ In v. 33, 
the same usage repeatedly occurs : — 
* And he shall make an atonement for 
(iiP) the priests, and for (p3') all the 
people of the congregation.' From these 



instances of the usus loquendi, which 
might be indefinitely multiplied, it 
would seem to be mdisputable that the 
goat was not viewed in this connexion 
as the instrument, but as the object of 
the expiation, and a reference to the 
Concordance we believe will show that 
the preposition ^51' al is never used in a 
similar connexion with 'l&iD kaphar^ 
but as denoting the person or thing 
which is the object of the atonement. 
Our English translation therefore is un- 
questionably wrong in rendering it in 
this place ^ with him,' instead of ' over, 
upon, or for him.' 

But still it may be asked how an 
atonement or reconciliation was made 
for, over, or on account of, the scape- 
goat, seeing that all the action men- 
tioned was confined to the animal itself? 
We refer for answer to the passage 
under consideration, and beg that its 
phraseology may be carefully scanned ; 
^ to make an atonement for him, to let 
him go to Azazel into the wilderness.' 
Our translators have here gratuitously 
inserted the word ' and' before *■ to let 
him go,' which is wanting in the origi- 
nal, and the absence of which afibrds, 
we believe, the true clue to the inter- 
pretation. The latter clause is exe- 
gctical of the former. The atonement 
was made by the letting go of the goat 
to Azazel. He was consigned over, by 
way of judgment and punishment, to the 
jurisdiction of Satan, as the type of a 
similar allotment towards the recreant 
and rejected Jews. It was thus, and 
thus only, that the Most High was to 
be propitiated for their offences, and 
we have only to appeal to the truth of 
history to learn how accurately the fact 
has corresponded with the typical pre- 
diction. 

But this is to be shown more fully by 
reference to the evangelical narrative, 
where, in the details of the crucifixion- 
scene, w^e may expect to recognize the 
fulfilment of the Old Testament earnests. 
There we behold the elect and accepted 
victim meekly submitting to the fearful 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVI. 



157 



death which the body of the nation cla- 
morously demanded, and by demanding 
which they sealed their own doom of 
dereliction. And as if on purpose to 
make the coincidences more remarka- 
ble, the controlling providence of God 
so orders it that almost by the decision 
of a lot Barabbas is released and Jesus 
retained for execution. In this incident 
we are furnished with a striking comi- 
terpart to the ceremonies of the expia- 
tion-day. In the release of the robber 
Barabbas we see the lot coming up with 
the inscription, ' for Azazel,' while in 
the condemnation of Christ, we read the 
opposite allotment, ' for Jehovah.^ We 
cannot refrain from regarding Barabbas 
in this transaction as an impersonation, 
a representative type, of the whole 
people to whom he belonged, and in the 
words of Peter on the day of Pentecost, 
we more than imagine that Ave see de- 
scribed the very process of selection and 
rejection which stands forth before us 
in the prescribed ceremonies of the Jew- 
ish Law ; Acts 3. 13-15 : ' The God of 
Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, 
the God of our father has glorified his 
Son Jesus, whom ye delivered up, and 
denied him in the presence of Pilate, 
when he was determined to let him go. 
But ye denied the Holy One and the 
Just, and desired a murderer to be 
granted unto j^ou ; and killed the Prince 
of life, whom God hath raised from the 
dead.' Here we have the t^^pical scene 
of the wilderness vividly enacted before 
ns in its substantiated realities of a far 
different place and a far distant age. 
In Barabbas released, with all his 
crimes upon his head, in accordance 
with the emission of the goat loaded 
with the sins of the congregation, we 
see a lively, and we doubt not, a de- 
signed, em.biematic presentation of the 
fact of the judicial thrusting forth of 
that covenant race, with the weight of 
the imprecated curse of God abiding 
upon them from one generation to ano- 
ther. Nay, so precise is the accordance 
14 



between the items of the adumbration 
and of the accomplishment, that we be- 
hold in Pilate the fore-shadowed 'fit 
man ' by whom the discharged goat was 
led forth into the wilderness. ' He 
shall send him away by the hand of a 
fit man into the wilderness.' The orig- 
inal is peculiar : '^t\'^ ID^Jj^ 1^!3 heyad 
ish itti, by the hand of a man timely f 
opportune, seasonable. The proper 
Greek rendering, as Bochart remarks, is 
KaipLoy, or evKaipcoj well-timed ; and the 
evangelist, in his account of Pilate's 
time-serving agency in the events of the 
crucifixion, presents us with the very 
man for the nonce, who is so significant- 
ly designated by the epithet before us. 
Matt. 27. 20-26 : ' But the chief priests 
and elders persuaded the multitude that 
they should ask Barabbas and destroy 
Jesus. The governor answered and 
said unto them. Whether of the twain 
will ye that I release unto you ? They 
said, Barabbas. Pilate saith unto them, 
What shall I do then with Jesus, which 
is called Christ? They all say unto 
him, Let him be crucified. And the 
governor said, W^hy ? what evil hath he 
done ? But they cried out the more, 
saying. Let him be crucified. When 
Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, 
but that rather a tumult was made, he 
took water, and washed his hands be- 
fore the multitude, saying, I am inno- 
cent of the blood of this just person ; 
see ye to it. Then answered all the 
people, and said. His blood be on us, 
and our children. Then released he 
Barabbas unto them : and when he had 
scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be 
crucified.' 

We here leave the subject, commend- 
ed to the calm consideration of our 
readers, to whom we say, in the lan- 
guage of Spencer, proposing his views 
of the same subject, — ' Si quis lumine 
perspicaciore donatus, hujus instituti 
rationes solidiores assignaverit, me 
minime pertinacem experietur ;' If any 
one possessed of clearer discernment 



158 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



9 And Aaron shall bring the goat 
upon which the Lord's lot fell, and 
ofter him for a sin-oifering. 

10 But the goat on which the lot 
fell to be the scape-goat, shall be 
presented alive before the Lord, 
to make ^^an atonement with him, 
and to let him go for a scape-goat 
into the wilderness. 

11 And Aaron shall bring the 
bullock of the sin-offering, which 
is for himself, and shall make an 
atonement for himself, and for his 
house, and shall kill the bullock 

k 1 John 2. 2. 

shall assign better reasons for this ordi- 
nance, he will find me far from being 
obstinate in adhering to my own solution. 

The Sin- offering for Aaron himself. 

W. And Aaron shall bring the bul- 
lock, &c. Upon comparing this verse 
with V. 6 above, it is quite evident that 
the term ' offer^ there implies no more 
than bringing the bullock to be offered^ 
and not the actual oblation, which did 
not take place till after the lots were 

cast upon the goats. ^ For his house. 

That is, says Sol. Jarchi, ^ for his breth- 
ren the priests ; for they all are called 
his house, as it is written, Ps. 135. 19, 
* O house of Aaron, bless ye the Lord.' 
And all their atonement was not, save 
for the uncleanness of the sanctuary, 
and the holy things thereof.' 

12. And he shall take a censer full of 
burning coals from off the altar, &c. 
This censer or fire-pan is called in the 
Gr. of the lxx. -n-vpeiov, fire-vessel, but 
in the Nev/ Testament this term never 
occurs 5 instead of it we have Xi/Savo^rug, 
incense-vessel or censer, as Rev. 8. 3,5, 
where mention is made of a ^ golden 
censer.' And it is worthy of remark 
that the Hebrew writers say, * Every 
(other) day, he whose duty it is to use 
the censer, putteth coals on a censer of 
silver, &c , but on this day the high 
priest putteth coals on a censer of gold.' 



of the sin-offering which is for 
himself: 

12 And he shall take la censer 
full of burning coals of fire from 
off the altar before the Lord, and 
his hands full of m sweet incense 
beaten small, and bring it within 
the vail : 

13 n And he shall put the incense 
upon the fire before the Lord, that 
the cloud of the incense may cover 
the o mercy-seat that is upon the 
testimony, that he die not. 

1 ch. 10. 1. Numb. 16. 18, 46. Rev. 8. 6. 
in Exod.30. 34, n Exod. 30. 1, 7, 8. Numb. 
16. 7, 18, 46. Rev. 8, 3, 4. o Exod. 25. 21. 



This service of burning incense, it will 
be noticed, comes in between the slay- 
ing of the bullock and the sprinkling 
of the blood in the holy of holies. The 
way into the inner sanctuary was to be 
prepared as it were, and the Most High 
made still more placable, by this pre- 
liminary act of raising a cloud of in- 
cense about the mercy-seat. That it 
had a typical purport there can be little 
doubt. Christ, before he entered with 
his own blood into heaven, the true 
holy of holies, prepared and sanctified 
himself and his entrance thither by his 
earnest prayer as recorded John 17, the 
whole of which chapter viewed in this 
connexion seems to resolve itself into a 
fragrant cloud of incense coming up be- 
fore the Father's throne prior to the 
effusion of his blood in its atoning effi- 
cacy. That this incense-offering was 
symbolical of prayer will be obvious 
upon reference to Rev. 8. 3, 4, * And 
another angel came and stood at the 
altar, having a golden censer ; and there 
was given unto him much incense, that 
he should offer it with the prayers of 
all saints upon the golden altar which 
was before the throne. And the smoke 
of the incense, which came with the 
prayers of the saints, ascended up be- 
fore God, out of the angel's hand.' See 
Note on Ex. 30. 3. 

13. The mercy-seat that is upon the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVL 



159 



14 And phe shall take of the blood 
of the bullock, and q spnnkle it 
with his finger upon the mercy- 
seat eastward : and before the 
mercy-seat shall he sprinkle of the 
blood with his finger seven times. 

15 11 r Then shall he kill the goat 
of the sin-offering that is for the 
people, and bring his blood s within 
the vail, and do with that blood as 

P ch. 4. 5. Heb. 9. 13, 25, and 10. 4. q ch. 
4. 6. r Heb. 2. 17, and 5. 2, and 9. 7, 28. 
s ver. 2. Heb. 6. 19, and 9. 3, 7, 12. 

testimony. That is, upon or over the 
tables of the law which were in the ark, 
often called the testimony. 

14. And he shall take ofthebloodj &c. 
It is to be understood that he had in the 
mean time come out of the most holy 
place, and now taking the blood, he re- 
turned thither, and sprinkled it, as the 
Jews maintain, not so properly upon as 
towards the ark ; for it is thus that they 
understand the original "^^D )^^ alpene, 
over against or towards. The Gr. how- 
ever has €7iL TO 'iXaarrjploVj upon the 
mercy-seat ; and in v. 15 it is clear that 
this must be the sense. 

The Sin-offering commanded for the 
People. 

51. Then shall he kill the goat of the 
sin-offeringj &c. After he had sprin- 
kled the bullock's blood for himself, he 
left it, says Maimonides, in the temple, 
upon a vase of gold that was there, and 
afterwards went out of the temple and 
killed the goat for the people. The 
blood of this victim he dealt with as 
with that of the bullock, as described 
in the preceding verse. 

16. And he shall make an atonement 
for the holy place, &c. That is, by the 
ceremonies foregoing, which he has 
just described. It was not a separate 
proceeding by which this expiation was 
made. But the ordinance itself is a 
most striking commentary upon the 
innate and actual depravity of fallen 
man. Though the high priest alone en- 



he did with the blood of the bul- 
lock, and sprinkle it upon the 
mercy-seat, and before the mercy- 
seat : 

16 And he shall tmake an atone- 
ment for the holy place, because of 
the uncleanness of the children of 
Israel, and because of their trans- 
gressions in all their sins ; and so 
shall he do for the tabernacle of 
the cono:reo:ation that remaineth 



t See Exod. 29. 
9. 22, 23. 



;. Ezek. 45. 18. Heb. 



tered into the holy of holies, yet it 
thereby became defiled, and must be 
purified from the uncleanness contracted 
by its contact with his person, even 
while engaged in the most sacred du- 
ties. So also with the tabernacle and 
the altar. The defiling power of the 
collective iniquities of the people sub- 
jected those structures also to the ne- 
cessity of a similar purgation. 

IT The tabernacle of the congregation 
that remaineth among them in the midst 
of their uncleanness. Heb. "pU^Ti hash- 
shokenj that abideth. The root of the 
original word is "ptD shdkan, from 
which comes shekinah, and it would 
scarcely be out of the way to render it 
here, — ' that shekinizeth among them.' 
The Gr. however has eKnanEvri^ builded, 
constructed, formed ; and to this word 
the apostle doubtless bad reference in 
Heb. 9. 11, ^ through a greater and more 
perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, 
that is, not of this building (ov ravnig 
Tr]g KTiascog).^ ' The temple of his body 
and the veil of his flesh, John 2. 21, 
Heb. 10. 20, were by imputation of our 
sins made as unclean, and sprinkled 
with his own precious blood, that he 
might reconcile us to God. Heb. 23. 
It was necessary that (Moses' taber- 
nacle and Solomon's temple) the pat- 
terns of things in the heavens should be 
purified with these (the sacrifices before 
mentioned), but the heavenly things 
themselves with better sacrifices thaa 
these.' — Ainsworth. 



160 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



among them in the midst of their 
uncleanness. 

17 u And there sliall be no man 
in the tabernacle of the congrega- 
tion when he goeth in to make an 
atonement in the holy place^ until 
he come out, and have made an 
atonement for himself, and for his 
household, and for all the congre- 
gation of Israel. 

18 And he shall go out unto the 
altar that is before the Lord, and 
X make an atonement for it ; and 
shall take of the blood of the bul- 
lock, and of the blood of the goat, 
and put it upon the horns of the 
altar round about. 

u See Exod. 34. 3. Luke 1. 10. x Exod. 
30. 10. ch. 4. 7, 18. Heb. 9. 22, 23. 

17. And thei'e shall he 7io man in the 
tabernacle, &c. None either of the 
people, or the priests who might ordi- 
narily be in attendance upon the servi- 
ces of the tabernacle. Throughout this 
most important part of the ceremony 
the high priest officiated alone. In 
this fact the typical character of his 
sacred functions appears very conspic- 
uous. The whole work of atonement 
for our sins was performed by Christ 
alone. No one aided him ; no one par- 
ticipated with him 5 he bore all our 
sufferings ; to him all the glory is due. 
He trod the wine-press alone, and of 
the people there was none with him. 
His own arm brought salvation. ' By 
himself he purged our sins.' * His own 
self bare our sins in his own body on 
the tree.' 

18. Shall go out unto the altar that is 
before the Lord. The words ^before 
the Lord ' would seem to indicate that 
the golden altar of incense in the holy 
place is intended ; and so it is generally 
understood by the Jewish and Christian 
commentators. In this case, the ' com- 
ing out' mentioned v. 17, must be re- 
ferred to his coming out of the holy of 
holies into the outer room, where the 
altar of incense stood. Patrick, how- 



I 19 And he shall sprinkle of the 
blood upon it with his finger seven 
times, and cleanse it, and y hallow 
it from the uncleanness of the 
children of Israel. 

20 H And when he hath made an 
end of z reconciling the holy place, 
and the tabernacle of the congre- 
gation, and the altar, he shall bring 
the live goat : 

21 And Aaron shall lay both his 
hands upon the head of the live 
goat, and confess over him all the 
iniquities of the children of Israel, 
and all their transgressions in all 
their sins, a putting them upon the 



y Ezek. 43. 20. z ver. 16. Ezek. 45. 20. 
a Isai. 53. 6. 



ever, contends that the altar of sacrifice 
is meant Avhich stood in the outer court, 
and that the high priest's * coming out,' 
V. 17, and his ' going out,' v. 18, was 
his coming out from the tabernacle. 
There is some reason to think this the 
correct interpretation, as otherwise we 
have no account whatever of the outer 
altar's being cleansed. The inference, 

however, is still uncertain. IT Shall 

take of the blood of the bullock and the 
goat. The blood of each animal was 
to be put into a basin, and thoroughly 
mingled together in order to its being 
smeared and sprinkled upon the altar. 

The Disposal of the Live or Scape-gnat, 
20. And when he hath made an end 
of reconciling the holy place. Heb. 
^&S^ ni)!3l vekillah mikkapper, and 
when he hath finished atoning^ or mak- 
ing atonement for. In like manner the 
original word for atone (at-one) is often 
rendered to reconcile ; and on the other 
hand the Gr. KaraWayr], reconciliation, 
is rendered Rom. 5. 11, by atonement. 
As we have gone so fully into the de- 
tails of the ceremony of the dismission 
of the scape-goat in our introductory 
remarks, little need be said by way of 
comment on the remaining particulars. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVI. 



le^i 



head of the goat, and shall send 
him away by the hand of a fit man 
into the wilderness : 
22 And the goat shall ^ bear upon 



22. And the goat shall bear upon him 
all thine iniquities unto a land not in- 
habited. Heb. nnTn yii^ bi^ el eretz 
geztrah, unto a land of separation. 
As the Rabbinical traditions respecting 
this ordinance are well condensed by 
Mr. Kitto, we give his note from the 
Pictorial Bible. ' The Rabbins inform 
us, that after the lot had been taken, 
the high-priest fastened a long fillet, or 
narrow piece of scarlet to the head of 
the scape-goat ; and that after he had 
confessed his own sins and those of the 
people over his head, or (for we are not 
quite certain about the point of time) 
when the goat was finally dismissed, 
this fillet changed color to white if the 
atonement w^as accepted by God, but 
else retained its natural color. It is to 
this that they understand Isaiah to al- 
lude when he says : — ' Though your 
sins be as scarlet, they shall be white 
as snow j though they be red like crim- 
son, they shall be as wool.' (Isai. I.IS.) 
After the confession had been made 
over the head of the scape-goat, it was 
committed to the charge of some per- 
son or persons, previously chosen for 
the purpose, and carried away into the 
wilderness ; where, as we should under- 
stand, V. 22, it was set at liberty ; but 
the Rabbins give a somewhat dififerent 
account. They inform us, (speaking 
with a particular reference to Jerusa- 
lem and the Temple service), that the 
goat was taken to a place about twelve 
miles from Jerusalem where there was 
a formidable rocky precipice • and they 
add, that for this occasion a sort of 
causeway was made between Jerusalem 
and this place, and that ten tents with 
relays were stationed at equal distances 
between them. On arriving at the pre- 
cipice the goat was thrown down from 
its summit, and by knocking against 
14* 



him all their iniquities unto a land 
not inhabited : and he shall let go 
the goat in the wilderness. 



b Isai. 53. 11, 12. 
1 Pet. 2. 24. 



John 1. '29. Heb. 9. 23. 



the projections, was generally dashed 
to pieces before it had half reached the 
bottom. It is added that the result of 
this execution was promptly communi- 
cated, by signals, raised at proper dis- 
tances, to the people who were anxiously 
awaiting the event at the Temple. It 
is also said, that at the same time a 
scarlet ribbon, fastened at the entrance 
of the Temple, turned red at this instant 
of time, in token of the divine accept- 
ance of the expiation ; and that this 
miracle ceased forty years before the 
destruction of the second Temple. We 
do not very well understand whether 
this fillet is a variation of the account 
which places one on the head of the 
goat, or whether there were two fillets, 
one for the goat and the other for the 
Tem.ple. If the latter, we may conclude 
that the change took place simultane- 
ously in both. However understood, it 
is very remarkable that the Rabbins, 
who give this account of the fillets, as- 
sign the cessation of the miracle by 
which the divine acceptance of this ex- 
piation was notified, to a period pre- 
cisely corresponding Avith the death of 
Christ — an event which most Christians 
understand to have been prefigured by 
atoning sacrifices, which they believe 
to have been done away by that final 
consummation of all sacrificial institu- 
tions. The assertion of the Apostle, 
that without the shedding of blood there 
is no remission of sin (Heb. 9. 22), ren- 
ders the account of the Rabbins that the 
goat was finally immolated, rather than 
left free in the wilderness, far from im- 
probable, were it not discountenanced 
by verse 22. It is however possible 
that the Jews may have adopted the 
usage described when they settled in 
Canaan, and could not so conveniently 
as in the wilderness carry the goat to 



162 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



23 And Aaron shall come into the 
tabernacle of the congregation, 
cand shall put off the linen gar- 
ments which he put on when he 
went into the holy placey and shall 
leave them there : 

c Ezek. 42. 14, and 44. 19. 

< a land not inhabited.' But they allow 
that it sometimes escaped alive into the 
desert, and was usually taken and eaten 
by the Arabs, who, of course, were little 
aware of what they did. See Calmet, 
Arts. '■ Azazel,' and ' Expiation ;' ' Jen- 
nings' ' Jewish Antiquities,' &c.' 

The Change of Vestments and the Sub- 
sequent Offering. 
23. And Aaron shall come into the 
tabernacle of the congregation^ and 
shall put off the linen garments^ &c. 
The ceremonies that followed the dis- 
mission of the goat into the wilderness, 
are thus detailed by Maimonides : ' After 
he has sent away the goat by the hand 
of him that led him, he returns to the 
bullock and goat whose blood he had 
sprinkled within the sanctuary, and 
opens them and takes out the fat, which 
he puts in a vessel, to burn them upon 
the altar. And he cuts the rest of their 
flesh into large pieces, but one cleaving 
to another and not parted asunder ; and 
these he sends by the hands of others 
to be carried out to the place of burning 
(without the camp. Lev. 16.27). When 
the goat is come into the wilderness, 
the high priest goes out into the wo- 
men's court to read the law. While he 
is reading, they burn the bullock and 
the goat in the place of the ashes (with- 
out the city), therefore he that sees the 
priest when he reads, sees not the bul- 
lock and the goat burnt. When he 
reads, all the people stand before him ; 
and the minister of the congregation 
takes up the book of the law, and gives 
it to the chief of the congregation, and 
he to the sagan (or second chief priest), 
and the sagan gives it to the high priest, 
who stands up when he receives it, and 



24 And he shall wash his flesh 
with water in the holy place, and 
put on his garments, and come 
forth, ti and ojfier his burnt-offering, 
and the burnt-offering of the peo- 
ple, and make an atonement for 
himself, and for the people. 

d ver. 3. 5. 



reads standing the 16th, and part of the 
23d, chapters of Leviticus, reading and 
blessing God both before and after. 
After this, he puts off his white gar- 
ments, and washes himself, and puts on 
his golden garments, and sanctifies his 
hands and his feet, and offers the goat 
which is for the general addition to this m 
day's service (Num. 29. 11), and offers 
his own ram, and the people's ram, as 
it is said, Lev. 16. 24. He then burns 
(on the altar) the fat of the bullock 
and of the goat, that were burnt with- m 
out the camp ; and he offers the daily ■ 
evening sacrifice (the lamb. Num. 
28. 3), and trims the lamps as on other 
days. After this he sanctifies his hands 
and feet, and puts off the golden gar- 
ments, and puts on his own common 
garments, and goes to his house, whi- 
ther all the people accompany him j 
and he keeps a feast, for that he is come 

out of the sanctuary.' — Ainsworth. 

IT And shall leave them there. Never 
more to be worn again, either by him or 
any one else, as they were required to 
be renewed every year. This is the 
uniform tradition of the Jews. 

24. He shall wash hisfiesh with water ^ 
&c. Heb. f n^ raUiatZj usually render- 
ed washj though sometimes haihe^ as in 
vv. 26, 28. How much of an ablution is 
properly implied by the term, it is diffi- 
cult to say. That it does not indicate 
a complete immersion of the body in 
water, would seem evident from the 
fact, that we read of no provision being 
made for such a rite, either in the holy 
place or in the court of the tabernacle. 
At the same time, we cannot well doubt 
that it signifies something more than 
the mere washing of the hands and feet. 
On the whole, the idea of a copious 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVL 



163 



25 And e the fat of the sin-offer- 
ing shall he bum upon the altar. 

26 And he that let go the goat 
for the scape-goat shall wash his 
clothes, fand bathe his flesh in 
water, and afterward come into 
the camp. 

27 g And the bullock /or the sin- 
offering, and the goat for the sin- 
offering, whose blood was brought 
in to make atonement in the holy 
place^ shall one carry forth without 

e ch. 4. 10. f ch 15. 5. g ch. 4. 12, 21, 
and 6. 30. Heb. 13. 11. 

affusion seems to come nearest to the i 
genuine import of the term. 

25. And the fat of the sin-offering 
shall he hum upon the altar. Heb. 
^'^tSp'^ yaktir, shall fume or burn as 
incense, according to the explanation 
given in the Note on Lev. 1.9, Ex. 29. 13. 
The burning of the fat upon the altar, 
and the burning of the body without the 
camp, is expressed by Moses by two 
different words. The altar upon which 
the fat was to be burnt, was of course 
the brazen altar in the court yard, for 
upon the golden altar nothing of the 
kind was permitted. Ex. 30. 9. 

26. And he that let go the goat for the 
scape-goat. Heb. ^^JJlirn r,5< n^lL^^OH 
btj!<t5?i hammeshaUeah eth hassa'ir la- 
azazelj he that sent or led away the 
goat to Azazel. The reading of the 
original decidedly confirms our previous 
view of the true purport of Azazel. It 
is wholly at variance v^ith the genius 
of the Hebrew to express such an idea 
as ' a goat for a scape-goat/ by such a 
phraseology as we here find. The force 
of the preposition "^ to, has another 
bearing altogether. It denotes devote- 
ment to a particular purpose or object. 
The ^ fit man ' who was the agent in 
this transaction, was considered as hav- 
ing contracted so much defilement by 
the office he performed, that he was not 
permitted to re-enter the camp without 
having undergone a previous lustration 
of his person. 



the camp ; and they shall burn in 
the fire their skins, and their flesh, 
and their dung. 

28 And he that burneth them 
shall wash his clothes, and bathe 
his flesh in water, and afterward 
he shall come into the camp. 

29 H And this shall be a statute 
for ever unto you : that ^ in the 
seventh month, on the tenth day 
of the month, ye shall afflict your 
souls, and do no work at all, whe^ 

h Exod. 30. 10. ch. 23. 27. Numb. 29. 7. 
Isai. 58. 3, 5. Dan. 10. 3, 12. 

27. Shall one carry forth without the 
camp. For the evangelical import of 
this part of the ceremonj^, as explained 
by the apostle, Heb. 13. 11, see Note on 
Lev. 6. 30. 

Recapitulation. 
29. This shall be a statute for ever 
unto you. Heb. tDil5> tipTO lehuk- 
kath oldmj for a statute of eternity. 
That is, through the whole period of 
that economy till Christ, the substance 
of the Levitical shadows, should come. 
See Note on Ex. 21. 6, where this phra- 
seology is more fully illustrated. 

IT Ye shall afflict your so^ds. Heb. 
tDi^'^ntZJi:^ t\^ 1j>n taanu eth naph- 
shothekem. Gr. raTSivwaa-e rag ^u^aj 
v[x(x)Vf ye shall humble souls. Our Eng- 
lish sense of the v/ord soul does not 
come up to the full import either of the 
Hebrew or Greek. Aswc have already 
shown in the Note on Gen. 12. 5, and 
elsewhere, the term lL*5j nephesh is 
used as equivalent to person, and there- 
fore includes the body as well as the 
soul, — and as fasting was one of the 
duties of the day, it is evidently to be 
understood in that latitude here. Thus 
also Ps. 35. 13, ' I humbled (Heb. afflict- 
ed) my soul with fasting.' Is. 58. 5, 
' Is it such a fast that I have chosen? 
a day for a man to afflict his soul P In 
the Hebrew idiom an abstinence from 
all corporeal delights, and a voluntary 
subjecting ones' self to penances and 



164 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



ther it be one of your own country, 
or a stranger that sojourneth among 
you : 

30 For on that day shall Me jDn€5^ 
make an atonement for you, to 
i cleanse you, that ye may be clean 
from all your sins before the Lord. 

31 kit shall be a sabbath of rest 
unto you, and ye shall afflict your 
souls by a statute for ever. 

32 1 And the priest whom he shall 
anoint, and whom he shall m con- 
secrate to minister in the priest's 
office in his father's stead, shall 
make the atonement, and »i shall 
put on the linen clothes, even the 
holy garments : 

33 And o he shall make an atone- 

i Ps. 51. 2. Jer. 33. 8. Eph. 5. 26. Heb. 
9. 13, 14, and 10. 1, 2. 1 John 1. 7, 9. k ch. 
23. 32. I ch. 4. 3, 5, 16. m Exod. 29. 29, 30. 
Numb 20, 26, 28. n ver. 4. o ver. 6, 16, 
18, 19, 24. 



mortifications, is termed ' afflicting the 

soul.' ¥ Bo no work at all. It being 

in fact regarded as a solemn Sabbath, 
as we learn from v. 31. It was to be a 
day wholly devoted to religious ser- 
vices of the most severe and engrossing 
character. 

30. For on that day^ shall the priest 
make an atonement for you. The ex- 
pression in the original is impersonal, 
and consequently equivalent to ^ atone- 
ment shall be made for you.' The Gr. 
has correctly e^L^aaerai. nepL vixoiv^ it shall 
he atoned for you. So also in like man- 
ner in v. 31, ' the priest whom he shall 
anoint' is but another form of saying, 

* the priest who shall be anointed,' as is 
clearly intimated by the Gr. rendering ; 

* whom they shall anoint.' 

34. For all their sins once a year. 
Many expiatory ceremonies have alrea- 
dy passed under our notice, as required 
in various circumstances ; but this was 
the grand and general expiation in which 
atoning sacrifices were made for all the 
sin and all the defilement of the pre- 
ceding year. Hence it was pre-emi- 
nently distinguished as the Day of 



ment for the holy sanctuary, and 
he shall make an atonement for 
the tabernacle of the congregation, 
and for the altar: and he shall 
make an atonement for the priests, 
and for all the people of the con- 
gregation. 

34 pAnd this shall be an ever- 
lasting statute unto you, to make 
an atonement for the children of 
Israel for all their sins q once a 
year. And he did as the Lord 
commanded Moses. 

CHAPTER XVII. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2 Speak unto Aaron, and unto his 
sons, and unto all the children of 
Israel, and say unto them, This is 

Pch. 23. 31. Numb. 29. 7. q Exod. 30. 
10. Heb. 9. 7, 25. 

Atonement. The idea of the institution 
seems to have been, that inasmuch as 
the incidental and occasional sin-offer- 
ings had, from their very nature, left 
much sin for which no expiation had 
been made, there should be a day in 
which all omissions of this sort should 
be supplied, by one general expiation, 
so that at the end of the year no sin or 
pollution might remain for which the 
blood of atonement had not been shed. 



CHAPTER XVII, 

The preceding ordinances relative to 
the ministration of the High Priest in 
the Holy of Holies, are here followed 
by others of a miscellaneous nature, 
having respect to the whole nation in 
the matter of sacrificial offering, and 
therefore addressed to them conjointly 
with Aaron and his sons. 

Precept in regard to the killing of 
Cattle. 
1, 2. Speak unto Aaron, and unto his 
sons. That is, unto the priests ; who 
were called ' the sons of Aaron,' by a 
usage of perpetual occurrence. As they 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVII. 



IGd 



the thing which the Lord hath 
commanded, saying, 
3 What man soever there be of 
the house of Israel, a that killeth 

a See Deut. 12. 5, 15, 21. 

were the appointed sacrificers for the 
people, the precepts before us were to 
be first addressed to them, and then 
through them to the whole collective 
people. 

3. What man soever there be of the 
house of Israel. Heb. t^'-^^72 "^"^^ H^^^H^ 
i&^'mj'^ ish ish mibbaith Yisrael, man, 
man, of the house of Israel ; to which 
the Gr. adds, ' or of the proselytes that 
are adjoined unto you ;' which is vir- 
tually warranted by the language of 

Moses in v. 8. IT That killeth an ox. 

Heb. t:ntZ3^ yisWhat, a word properly 
signifying to slaughter in general, and 
not peculiarly limited to the slaying of 
animals by way of sacrifice, although 
very frequently employed in that sense. 
At the same time, considerable doubt 
hangs over its genuine import in this 
connexion. Commentators are by no 
means agreed as to the true-meant de- 
sign of the precept. Michaelis, Rosen- 
muUer, and others contend that the 
point of the enactment is, that the 
Israelites should bring the animals they 
intended ioViW for food to the taberna- 
cle, to be dealt with ^s peace-offerings, 
the blood being applied and the fat con- 
sumed as in such sacrifices, the rest 
being eaten by the ofierer, as in the 
regular sacrifices of this class. In 
proof of this, Michaelis insists on the 
import of the original word "OTV^ sha- 
'hat, to kill in general, and its distinc- 
tion from i^nt zaba^h, to kill for sacri- 
fice. But the use of these terms by the 
sacred writers is too indiscriminate to 
allow of any definite conclusion being 
built upon it. Still it is possible that 
what Michaelis affirms may be the gen- 
uine import of the passage, and the 
additional reason that he suggests for it 
is not without considerable weight, viz. 
the prevention of secret sacrifices to 



an ox, or lamb, or goat in tne camp, 

or that killeth it out of the camp, 

4 b And bringeth it not unto the 

door of the tabernacle of the con- 

b Deut. 12. 0, 6, 13, 14. 



idols. ' Considering the propensity to 
idolatry which the people brought with 
them from Egypt, it was necessary to 
take care lest, when any one killed 
such animals as were usual for sacri- 
fices, he should be guilty of supersti- 
tiously offering them to an idol. This 
precaution was the more reasonable, 
because, in ancient times, it was so 
very common to make anoff'ering of the 
flesh which a person intended to eat, 
and because the Israelites could but 
rarely enjoy that sort of food in the 
wilderness. And hence arose a sus- 
picion not very unreasonable, that who- 
ever killed animals usually devoted to 
the altar, offered them of course ; and 
therefore Moses enjoined the Israelites 
not to kill such animals otherwise than 
in public, and to off'er them all to the 
true God, that so it might be out of their 
power to make them offerings to idols, 
by slaughtering them privately, and 
under the pretence of using them for 
food.' 

But to this view of the subject there 
are two objections, apparently formida- 
ble, which Michaelis feels himself 
called upon to answer. (1.) It is asked 
whether it be credible that God would 
have imposed such a hardship upon his 
people as not to concede to them the 
use of animal food, unless it were first 
presented before the tabernacle, and 
then virtually converted into a religious 
oflfering? (2.) How is the precept, 
when thus viewed, to be reconciled with 
Deut. 12. 13-15; where, after command- 
ing that all the burnt-offerings should 
be offered in one place, it is added, 
* Notwithstanding, thou mayest kill and 
eat flesh in all thy gates, whatsoever 
thy soul lusteth after, according to the 
blessing of the Lord thy God which he 
hath given thee : the unclean and the 



166 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



gregation, to offer an offering unto 
the Lord before the tabernacle of 
the Lord : blood shall be c imputed 

c Rom. 5. 13. 

clean may eat thereof, as of the roe- 
buck, and as of the hart.' 

To the first of these objections our 
author replies, that the Israelites, like 
most of the modern Orientals, particu- 
larly the nomade tribes, were but little 
addicted to the use of flesh-meat ; that 
they seldom killed beasts but for sacri- 
fice ; and that among them seasons of 
sacrifice were for the most part the only 
seasons of feasting, so that what was 
enjoined by this law, was what would 
ordinarily be done, whether the animals 
were formally offered or not. This then 
would have been no particular hardship. 
Nor must we forget that while the Is- 
raelites continued in the wilderness, 
and without any appropriated lands, 
they could but very seldom have in- 
dulged in a flesh diet, without being in 
danger of extirpating their herds. In- 
deed, properly speaking, only the two 
tribes of Reuben and Gad, with the half 
tribe of Manasseh, had herds (Num. 
32) ; the other tribes being in general 
but poorly provided in this respect. In 
these circumstances, the Israelites could 
easily bear a law which contributed to 
the preservation and increase of their 
herds ; especially when we consider 
that during their sojourn in the wilder- 
ness, their cattle could not be multiplied 
as when they had ceased to be a nomade 
people. 

As to the second objection, founded 
upon the grant so expressly recorded 
Deut. 12. 13-15, his solution is equally 
plausible. He thinks the law contained 
in the chapter before us was only in- 
tended to operate temporarily during 
the wandering in the wilderness, and 
that the law in Deuteronomy, delivered 
just before the entrance of the Hebrews 
into Canaan, was intended expressly to 
repeal that now under consideration, 
lodeed the lacguagc of that second 



\ 



unto that man, he hath shed blood ; 
and that man <i shall be cut off 
from among his people : 

d Gen. 17. 14. 

statute would seem decidedly to favor 
this construction, for the amount of it 
is (v. 8, 9), that they were not to do in 
Palestine every thing which they were 
then in the practice of doing in the 
desert, every one at his pleasure, not 
being yet come to their permanent in- 
heritance. It is contended, accordingly, 
that the reasons for the repeal are 
nearly as obvious as those for the origi- 
nal law. A new and more instructed 
generation would have arisen than that 
which had been so deeply imbued with 
the idolatries of Egypt, and the occa- 
sion for the restriction would therefore 
not have been strong. And besides, the 
observance of the original law would 
have been scarcely practicable when 
the Hebrews became settled in Pales- 
tine. They would naturally then be 
disposed to consume more animal food, m 
as settled people usually do even in the ^ 
East, than when nomades ; and yet this 
law would nearly have operated as au 
interdiction to a great part of the popu- 
lation, w^ho, residing at a distance from 
the tabernacle or temple, would have 
been obliged to take a long journey with 
their oxen, sheep, or goats, to oflfer 
them at the altar before they could 
taste their meat. 

On the whole, although Ainsworth, 
Patrick, and some others understand 
this law as having reference solely to 
animals kUiedfor sacrifice, yet we are 
more inclined to adopt the view stated 
above, which is adopted also by Scott 
and other expositors of high repute in 
modern limes. For farther remarks 
upon the scope of the law itself, and 
some apparent exceptions, see Note on 
Deut. 12. 13-15. 

4. Blood shall be imputed unto that 
man. That is, that man shall be ac- 
counted a murderer. In shedding the 
blood of the animal he shall be deemed 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVII. 



167 



5 To the end that the children 
of Israel may bring their sacrifices 
e which they offer in the open field, 
even that they may bring them 
unto the Lord, unto the door of 
the tabernacle of the congregation, 
unto the priest, and offer them /or 
peace-offerings unto the Lord. 

e Gen. 21. 33, and 22. 2, and 31. 54. Deut. 
12. 2. 1 Kings 14. 23. 2 Kings 16. 4, and 17. 
10. 2 Chron. 28. 4. Ezek. 20. 28, and 22. 9. 

to have shed the blood of a human being, 
and guilt shall rest upon him accord- 
ingly. So in a case where a similar 
profanation of a divine ordinance, by 
disregarding its spirit, is spoken of, it 
is said, Is. 66. 3, ' He that killeth an ox 

is as if he slew a man.' IT That man 

shall be cut off. Heb. ^^nn 'iU'^JS;!! DI^DD 
nikrath haish hahu, v/hich the Gr. ren- 
ders £^oX£9p£v6l]G£Tai Tj IpV^^fj £K£ivr], that 

soul shall be destroyed, where it will be 
observed that * that souP in the version 
answers to ' that man ' in the original. 
On the import of this phrase, see Note 
on Gen. 17. 14. The intimation here 
undoubtedly is, either that the sentence 
of death should be passed upon the of- 
fender by the magistrate, or that God 
would directly interfere and cut him off 
from among the living, though not, we 
presume, in a miraculous manner, but 
by so ordering his providence, as to en- 
sure that result. The latter sense will 
perhaps appear the most probable by 
comparing the present with v. 10, where 
he threatens to execute vengeance with 
his own hand against him who should 
be guilty of ' eating blood.' If the 
punishment should seem severe, we are 
to remember that the law was intended 
to be a preventative to idolatry, and the 
penalties enacted for this crime were 
necessarily very severe, for the reasons 
mentioned in the Introduction to the 
Notes on the second vohime of Exodus, 
to which the reader is referred. 

5. To the endj &c. Expressive of 
the general scope of the present statute, 
which is to call ihem off from all prac- 



6 And the priest fshall sprinkle 
the blood upon the altar of the 
Lord at the door of the tabernacle 
of the congregation, and g burn the 
fat for a sweet savour unto the 
Lord. 

7 And they shall no more offer 
their sacrifices b unto devils, after 

f ch. 3. 2. s Exod. 29. 18. ch. 3. 5, 11, 16 
and 4. 31, Numb. 18. 17. ^ Deut. 32. 17. 
2 Chron. 11. 15. Ps. 106. 37. 1 Cor. 10. 20. 
Rev. 9. 20. 

tices of an idolatrous tendency, by re- 
quiring them to bring the flesh of slain 
animals which they would otherwise be 
in danger of sacrificing to demons in 
the open fields, to the precincts of the 
tabernacle, and there converting them 
to ' peace-offerings to the Lord ' before 
they were eaten. So if we would have 
our daily food most signally blessed to 
us, let us first consecrate it to the boun- 
teous Giver, and vow to him all the 
strength and refreshment that we may 

derive from the use of it. ^ Which 

they offer in the open field. Heb. ^122^ 
mm "15& ^2? &^nnt tn asher Kern zo- 
be^him al pene hassadeh, which they 
(are) sacrificing on the face of the field, 
i. e. w^hich they were heretofore in the 
habit of offering, or which they might 
now be inclined to offer, after a heathen 
fashion, in the open fields and high 
places. The Jewish writers say, * Be- 
fore the tabernacle was set up, the high 
places were lawful ; and the service 
was by the first-born ; after the taber- 
nacle was erected, the high places were 
unlawful, and the service was performed 
by the priests.' This limitation as to 
the place of worship is graciously done 
away under the gospel, Mai. 1. 11, < My 
name shall be great among the Gentiles, 
and in every place incense shall be of- 
fered unto my name, and a pure of- 
fering.' 

7. They shall offer no more their sa- 
crifices unto devils. Heb. Q^'l^i^^J) 
lasse'irim, to goats ; Chal. S'^lIZ) shadim, 
wasting or destroying creatures; Gr. 
ToU \iaTaiois^ to vain things. Vulg. 



168 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



whom ihey i have gone a whoring : 
this shall be a statute for ever 
unto them throughout their gene- 
rations. 

8 H And thou shalt say unto them, 
Whatsoever man there he of the 
house of Israel, or of the strangers 
which sojourn among you, k that 
offereth a burnt-offering or sacrifice, 

9 And I bringeth it not unto the 
door of the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation, to offer it unto the Lord ; 

i Exod. 34. 15. ch. 20. 5. Deut. 31. 16. 
Ezek. 23. 8. k ch. 1. 2, 3. 1 ver. 4. 

* Dsemonibus/ to demons. The original 
Hebrew term here rendered ' devils,' 
properly signifies hairy oneSj or crea- 
tures rough, rugged) and shaggy in as- 
pect ; and hence is applied not only to 
he-goatSf but to certain fabulous beings 
or sylvan gods, who were popularly 
supposed to appear in the form of goats. 
Herodotus says that all goats were 
worshipped in Egypt, particularly the 
he-goat) and from these sprung Pan, 
Sileuus, and the innumerable herd of 
imaginary beings, satyrs, dryads, fauns, 
&c. all woodland gods, and held in ven- 
eration among the Egyptians, Greeks, 
and Romans. From this source too it 
is not unlikely that the popular repre- 
sentations of the devil in Christian 
countries, in which he is represented as 
having a goat-like form, with a tail, 
horns, and cloven feet, are borrowed. 
Such representations certainly bear a 
strong resemblance to what was fan- 
cied of the appearance of the ancient 
heathen Pan, whose name, from his 
striking terror into the popular mind? 
has given rise to our English word 
panic. The language would seem evi- 
dently to imply that the Israelites had 
been formerly, or during their residence 
in Egypt, addicted to the worship of 

these fictitious deities. IT After whom 

they have gone a whoring. Chal. ' With 
whom they have erred or committed 
idolatry.' This term is often employed 
in the Scriptures to denote idolatry, be- 



even that man shall be cut off from 
among his people. 

10 II m And whatsoever man there 
be of the house of Israel, or of the 
strangers that sojourn among you, 
that eateth any manner of blood ; 
n I will even set my face against 
that soul that eateth blood, and 
will cut him off from among his 
people. 

m Gen. 9. 4. ch. 3. 17, and 7. 26, 27, and 
19. 26. Deut. 12. 16, 23, and 15. 23. 1 Sam. 
14. 33. Ezek. 44. 7. n ch. 20. 3, 5, 6, and 
26. 17. Jer. 44. 11. Ezek. 14. 8, and 15. 7. 

cause that was a violation of the cove- 1 
nant between God and his people, which 
is repeatedly denominated a marriage 
covenant. Comp. Ex. 34. 15, Deut. 
31. 16, Judg. 8. 33. 

8, 9. And thou shalt say unto them, 
&c. The law enacted in these two 
verses we conceive to differ from the 
foregoing, by having respect exclusively 
to beasts slain for sacrifice, and not for 
food. It is an emphatic declaration 
of the divine will as to the place v/here 
all sacrificial offerings should be made. 
As God designed there should be one 
altar, one high-priest, one sanctuary, 
and one commonwealth of Israel, this 
unity of the nation and the religion 
would be destroyed if various altars and 
priests, and various places of offerings, 
were allowed. Besides, a plurality of 
priests, altars, and sanctuaries, would 
very naturally lead to a plurality of 
gods, and thus all the evils of idolatry 
would be gradually introduced into the 
worship of the chosen people. The 
statute before us, requiring all their 
sacrifices to be presented at one place, 
was happily adapted to prevent these 
consequences. 

The Eating of Blood forbidden, ^ 

10. That eateth any manner of blood. 
This prohibition is met with twice 
elsewhere in the Leviiical law. Lev. 
3. 17,-— 7. 26, besides its bemg found in 
the precepts of Noah, Gen. 9. 4. It is 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVII. 



169 



11 o For the life of the flesh is in 
the blood ; and I have given it to 
you upon the altar, p to make an 

ver. 14. P Matt. 26. 28. Mark 14. 24. 
Rom. 3. 25, and 5. 9. Ephes. 1.7. Col. 1. 14, 

repeated again and again, and much 
stress laid upon it as a law that has 
more in it than would at first appear. 
The reason here annexed to it is con- 
sidered below, in the note on the ensu- 
ing verse. It is to be remarked, how- 
ever, that the blood of clean fishes, of 
locusts, and of creeping things, is un- 
derstood by the Jews to be excepted 

from this prohibition. "{[ I mil even 

set my face against that soul^ &c. Heb. 
■^^D '^nril ndthatti pdnai, I will give 
my face. Gr. errio-rrjc-cu TO jrpocrcdTTOV jxov. 
Chal. ' I will set mine anger against the 
man.' The original word for * face ' is 
often used by the sacred writers for 
* anger,' as may be seen by the follow- 
ing passages : Gen. S3. 20, ' I will ap- 
pease him' (Heb. ' I will appease his 
face^y Lam. 4. 15, ' The anger (Heb. 
face) of the Lord hath divided them.' 
Jer. 3. 12, * And I will not cause mine 
anger (Heb. face) to fall upon you.' 
1 Pet. 3. 12, ' The face (i. e. anger) of 
the Lord is against them that do evil.' 
11. For the life of the flesh is in the 
blood. Heb. Js^^H tl"»n ^IDDH 123&3 ^ID 
ki nephesh habbdsdr baddom hi, for the 
life or soul of the flesh it is in the blood. 
Gr. V yap ^vx^i ^^'^^^ cap^dg acjjLa avrov 
eariv, for the life or soul of all flesh is 
the blood thereof. This was not per- 
haps intended to be affirmed as a strictly 
physiological fact; but simply to ex- 
press what appears to be the truth, and 
what was popularly regarded as such. 
The seat of vitality was ostensibly in 
the blood, because if the blood was shed 
life became extinct. Yet it is not a 
little remarkable that the researches of 
modern anatomists and physiologists 
have brought them in the main to the 
same conclusion, namely, that the blood 
is actually possessed of a principle of 
intality. This, it is said, is demon- 
15 



atonement for your souls : for q it 
is the blood that maketh an atone- 
ment for the soul. 

20. Heb. 13. 12. 1 Pet. 1, 2. 1 John 1, 7. 
Rev. 1. 5. q Heb. 9. 22. 

strated by the following among other 
facts. If blood be taken from the arm 
in the most intense cold that the human 
body can suffer, it will raise the ther- 
mometer to the same height, as blood 
taken in the most sultry heat. Now it 
is known that living bodies alone have 
the power of resisting great degrees of 
heat and cold, and of maintaining in al- 
most every situation, while in health, 
that temperature which we distinguish 
by the name of animal heat. But it is 
by no means necessary to insist on this 
as implied in the words of our text. 
The sacred scriptures have little to do 
with the absolute verities of natural sci- 
ence. These we are to ascertain from 
other sources, and establish by other 

evidence. See Note on Gen. 9. 4. 

IT It is the blood that maketh an atone- 
ment for the soul. By transgression a 
man forfeits his life to divine justice, 
and he must die did not mercy provide 
him a substitute. The life of a beast 
is appointed and accepted by God as a 
substitute for the sinner^s life ; but as 
this life is in the blood, and as the blood 
is the grand principle of vitality, there- 
fore the blood is to be poured out upon 
the altar, and thus the life of the beast 
becomes a substitute for the life of 
the man. But this was a typical ordi- 
nance, having direct reference to the 
atonement of Christ. Christ not only 
died for sinners, but our redemption is 
ever ascribed to his blood : for in order 
to make a satisfactory atonement, he 
not only bowed his head upon the cross 
and gave up the ghost, but his side was 
opened, the pericardium and the heart 
evidently pierced, that the vital fluid 
might be poured out from the very seat 
of life, and that thus the blood which is 
the life should be shed to make expia- 
tion for the life of the soul. The forbid- 



170 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



12 Therefore I said unto the 
children of Israel, No soul of you 
shall eat blood, neither shall any- 
stranger that sojourneth among 
you eat blood. 

13 And whatsoever man there he 
of the children of Israel, or of the 
strangers that sojourn among you, 
which rhunteth and catcheth any 
beast or fowl that may be eaten ; 
he shall even spour out the blood 
thereof, and t cover it with dust. 

14 u For it is the life of all flesh, 

r ch. 7. 26. s Deut. 12. 16, 24, and 15. 23. 
t Ezek. 24. 7- u ver. 11, 12. Gen. 9. 4. 
Deut. 12. 23. 

din^ the eating of blood therefore would 
naturally tend to beget a devout and 
reverent regard for that precious fluid 
which was visibly represented in the 
blood of the victims slain upon the Jew- 
ish altar. 

12, Therefore I said unto the children 
of Israel, &c. "Whatever other reasons 
might previously have existed for this 
prohibition (Gen. 9. 4), yet this is the 
reason why it is to be forbidden to the 
children of Israel, and to all that saw 
fit to adjoin themselves to the holy 
people. 

Additional Precepts in regard to Blood 
and the Carcasses of Beasts. 

13. And whatsoever man there be, &c. 
In this and the subsequent verses the 
law given above respecting the use of 
blood of sacrificed beasts is extended to 
that of all other creatures common for 
food, whether wild or tame, but espe- 
cially such as were taken in hunting. 
The blood was to be carefully drained 
from the body, and decorously covered 

over with earth. ^ He shall even 

pour out the blood thereof and cover it 
with dust. Lest it should be licked up by 
any other animal, which he would have 
them avoid, either because the taste 
of blood might generate a destructive 
thirst for it, or because he would not 
have any thing so sacred as blood ex- 
posed to profanation. The covering of 



the blood of it is for the life there- 
of: therefore I said unto the child- 
ren of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood 
of no manner of flesh: for the life 
of all flesh is the blood thereof: 
whosoever eateth it shall be cut off. 
15 xAnd every soul that eateth 
that which died of itself, or that 
which was torn with Leasts, (whe- 
ther it be one of your own country, 
or a stranger) yhe shall both wash 
his clothes, z and bathe himself in 

X Exod. 22. 31. ch. 22. 8. Deut. 14. 21. 
Ezek. 4, 14, and 44. 31. y ch. 11. 25. z ch. 
15. 6. 

the blood also conveyed the intimation ..m 
that it should not be imputed as a mat- ■ 
ter of guilt to the shedder, as appears 
from the contrary, Job 16. 18, ' earth, 
cover not thou my blood, and let my 
cry have no place.' Ezek. 24. 7, 8, ^ 
' For her blood is in the midst of her ; 
she sets it upon the top of a rock j she 
poured it not upon the ground, to cover 
it with dust ; that it might cause fury 
to come up to take vengeance ; I have 
set her blood upon the top of a rock that 
it should not be covered ;^ where the 
blood not covered, signifies a crying to 
God for vengeance. The Jews regard 
this as a very weighty precept, and 
appoint that the blood should be cover- 
ed with these words : ' Blessed is he 
that hath sanctified us by his precepts, 
and commanded us to cover blood.' 

15. That which died of itself, or that 
which was torn with beasts. This is 
still but the application of the main law 
in regard to blood ; for in both cases, 
the blood was retained in the body ; 
hence the council at Jerusalem forbade 
things strangled, as well as blood ; 
because in such beasts, the blood was 
coagulated in the veins and arteries. 

IF He shall wash his clothes. In this 

case it is supposed that the person 
sinned ignorantly or through inadvert- 
ency, not of deliberation or set purpose ; 
for any presumptuous sin was to be fol- 
lowed by exemplary judgments. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



171 



water, and be unclean until the 
even : then shall he be clean. 
16 But if he wash them not, nor 



CHAPTER XVIII. 

As the chosen and covenant tribes of 
Israel were soon to take up their jour- 
ney to the land of Canaan, the mhabit- 
ants of which were to be exterminated 
for their multifarious iniquities in the 
sight of God, a recital is here made of 
some of those aggravated forms of 
wickedness which were rife among 
them, and which God had determined 
signally to punish. This is done not 
only to illustrate the justice of the 
divine proceedings in their excision, but 
also with a view to put the peculiar 
people themselves on their guard against 
yielding to the contagion of their per- 
nicious example, and thus becoming 
obnoxious to the same fearful retribu- 
tions which were now about to be visit- 
ed upon the Canaanites. The particu- 
lar class of abominations more espe- 
cially pointed out in this chapter, and 
to which the brand-mark of the divine 
reprobation is so conspicuously affixed, 
is that of incestuous connexions. Not 
only had that abandoned race been 
guilty of a total apostacy from the wor- 
ship of the true God, substituting in his 
room the sun, and moon, and host of 
heaven, and bowing down to stocks and 
stones and creeping things, but they had 
mingled with their idolatry every vice 
that could degrade human nature and 
pollute society. In the black catalogue 
of these, the abominations of lust stand 
pre-eminent ; and whether in the form 
of adultery, fornication, incest, sodomy, 
or bestiality, they had now risen to a 
pitch of enormity which the forbearance 
of heaven could tolerate no longer, and 
of which a shuddering dread was to be 
begotten in the minds of the people of 
the covenant. And in order that no 
possible plea of ignorance or uncer- 
tainty might be left in their minds as to 



bathe his flesh, then a shall he bear 
his iniquity. 



a ch. 5. 1, and 7. 
19. 20. 



IS, and 19. 8. Numb. 



those connexions which were lawful 
and those which were forbidden, the 
Most High proceeds in the present and 
in the 20th chapter to lay down a num- 
ber of specific prohibitions on this sub- 
ject, so framed, as not only to include 
the extra-nuptial pollutions, which had 
prevailed among the heathen, but also 
all those incestuous unions which were 
inconsistent with the purity and sanc- 
tity of the marriage relation. Both 
classes of crimes we think are in fact 
included ; so that it is doing no violence 
to the spirit of the text to regard it as 
containing a system of marriage-laws 
by which the peculiar people were ever 
after to be governed. 

As this is the only passage in the 
compass of the whole Bible where any 
formal enactments are given on this 
subject, this and the connected chapters 
treating of this theme have always been 
deemed of peculiar importance in their 
relations to the question of the lawful 
degrees, within which the marriage con- 
nexion may now be formed by those who 
make the law of God the great standard 
of moral duty. But it is more especially 
with reference to the lawfulness of mar- 
riage with a deceased wife^s sister that 
the bearings of this chapter become 
important to us under the gospel, and 
at the present time j as it is well known 
that the occurrence of cases of that kind 
has often greatly agitated the religious 
communions to which the parties be- 
longed, and even at the present day, the 
difficulty of effecting an entire unanim- 
ity of sentiment among Christians ap- 
pears as great as ever. We can scarcely 
expect, indeed, within the limits which 
the nature of the present work will 
allow, to bring the matter to a decisive 
issue, even if we were entirely confi- 
dent on which side the truth lay, which 
we are forced to acknowledge we are 



172 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



not. The Just decision of the question 
necessarily involves the establishment 
of several great preliminary principles 
of interpretation, besides a display of 
the idiomatic usages of the Hebrew 
philologically exhibited, which cannot 
well be made satisfactory in a small 
compass. But as the subject is one on 
which the truth is perhaps to be reached 
only by the gradual accumulation of 
evidence, we venture with others to 
contribute our small quota of sugges- 
tion towards the solution of a very im- 
portant point, not of criticism only, but 
also of casuistry. 

It will probably be seen that our 
leanings arc to the side of the unlaiv- 
fulness of the connexion j but recent 
discussions have brought forth so strong 
an array of arguments in support of the 
opposite theory, that it seems, on the 
whole, no more than is due to the pre- 
sentation of evidence on both sides, that 
we should at present hold our judgment 
in suspense, simply giving to the reader 
a succinct but faithful view of the prin- 
cipal reasonings relied upon by the ad- 
vocates of each. 

1. The Meaning of the Phrase ^ Near 
of Kin: 
In the general enunciation of the law, 
V. 6, it is said, ' None of you shall ap- 
proach to any that is near of kin to him 
to uncover their nakedness.' The orig- 
inal phrase is l^tDD 'IJJ^tD sheer besdrOf 
remainder of his fleshy whereas in other 
cases, though not numerous, the term 
employed to signify kindred is !2l1p 
kdrob, from ^'^p kdrdby to draw nigh. 
Michaelis' remarks on the terms in 
question (Comment. L.of M. Art. 102), 
are as follows : — ' If the reader wishes 
to know what these words etymologi- 
cally signify, I shall here just state to 
him my opinion, but without repeating 
the ground on which it rests. Sheer 
means, (1.) a remnant ; (2.) the rem- 
nant of a meal ; (3.) a piece of any 
thing eatable J such ^s flesh • (4.) a piece 
of any thing in general. Hence we 



find it subsequently transferred to rela- 
tionship in the Arabic language ; in 
which, though with a slight orthogra- 
phical variation, that nearest relation 
is called Ta'ir or Thsdir, whom the 
Hebrews denominate Goel. In this 
way. Sheer J even by itself, would sig- 
nify a relation. Basar, commonly ren- 
dered flesh J is among the Hebrews 
equivalent to body • and may thence 
have been applied to signify relation- 
ship. Thus, thou art my fleshy or body f 
(Gen. 29. 14), means thou art my near 
kinsman. When both words are put 
together, Sheer-basar, they may be ren- 
dered literally corporeal relation, or by 
a half Hebrew phrase, kinsman after 
the flesh. In their derivation, there 
are no farther mysteries concealed, nor 
any thing that can bring the point in 
question to a decision ; and what mar- 
riages Moses has permitted or com- 
manded, we cannot ascertain from Sheer- 
basar, frequent and extensive as is its 
use in his marriage-laws : but must de- 
termine, from his own ordinances, in 
which he distinctly mentions what 
Sheer-basar, that is, what relations, are 
forbidden to marry.' That the ideal con- 
nexion of the term li^lD sheer, with flesh 
is somewhat close is evident from the 
following instances ; Ps. 73. 26, ' My 
flesh C^^a^ll^ she'eri) and my heart fail- 
eth.' Ps. 78. 20, ' Can he give bread also ? 
Can he provide ^es/i Q^)^^^ sheer) for his 
people ? Prov. 5. 11, ' And thou mourn 
at the last when thy flesh and thy body 
C^lJi^231 "^TiH besdrka u-sheereka) are 
consumed,' where however the original 
for ' flesh' is ^IDI bdsdr, and ^Js^lZJ sheer 
is rendered by ' body.' In a few in- 
stances, out of the present connexion, it 
is rendered, as here, by ^ kin ' or ^ kins- 
man,' as Lev. 21. 2, < But for his kin 
that is near unto him (^^pH l^i^tL'^ 
l^ifi^ Usher hakkdrob elauv), for his 
mother,' &c. Num. 27. 11, < And if his 
father have no brethren, then ye shall 
give his inheritance unto his kinsman 
that is next to him (y^^^ ^'IpH l^fi^tD^ 
lishero hakkdrob elauv), of his family,' 



I 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIIL 



173 



&c. The peculiar combination ^i^uD 
TJL'm sheej' bclsdr, remainder of Jiesh, 
occurs only in v. 16 of this chapter, and 
Lev. 25. 49, ' Either his uncle or his 
uncle's son may redeem him^ or any 
that is nigh of kin unto him Cli^'tl'^b 
^y^2 mishsheer besaro, any of his re- 
mainder of flesh). ^ The usage of the 
Greek in these cases is peculiar. It 
seems to be founded on the assumption, 
that the kindred here specified were in 
the habit of living together, as the term 
is invariably some form of olkeio; do- 
mestic, including those of the same 
household. Thus v. 6, ' None of you 
shall approach to any that is near of 
kin to him.^ Gr. irpog iravra oiKzia (oth. 
cop. oiKEiav) aapKos avTov, to any domes- 
tic (relation) of his own flesh. V. 12, 
' Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness 
of thy father's sister; for she is thy 
father's near kinswoman.^ Gr. oiKaa 
yap -arpog aov sari, for she is the domes- 
tic (relation) of thy father. So also 
V. 13, where mention is made of the 
mother's sister. And again, v. 17, 
' For they are her near kinswomen.' Gr. 
oiKsiai yap aov eicriv, for they are thy 
domestic (relations).' The tacit refer- 
ence is probably to the nomade mode 
of life, in which the tents of near rela- 
tives were pitched in the close vicinity 
of each other, and their inmates were 
in habits of the most unrestrained inter- 
course. Indeed Maimonides lays it 
down as the general ground and reason 
of the following prohibitions, that the 
parties here debarred from marriage are 
such as were so bound together in do- 
mestic intimacy, that unless marriage 
were strictly forbidden between them, 
a door would have been opened for 
scenes of the grossest corruption in the 
circle of families and kindred. This 
fact in regard to the different modes of 
social life prevailing among the ancient 
Hebrews and with us, is undoubtedly to 
be taken into account in the present 
discussion^ and should be set down to 
the advantage of those Vvho maintain that 
the present laws are not binding upon us. 



But we return to the import of the 
expression before us, •' remainder of 
flesh.' The phraseology is somewhat 
peculiar, as conveying the idea of 
nearness of kin. The use of it in this 
sense probably arose from the fact that 
in the original institution of marriage, 
the parties were pronounced to be ' one 
flesh.' In this case, therefore, one 
might be said to be in relation to the 
other, the ' remainder of his or her 
flesh f and nothing could give a more 
impressive idea of the sacred nearness 
and oneness constituted between the 
parties by the marriage compact. So a 
child born of such a union is a ' remain- 
der of flesh ' in respect to his parents, 
and his parents to him. Thus too a 
brother and sister, the offspring of the 
same parents, are the ' remainder of 
flesh' to each other ; and this sense of 
the phrase is illustrated in the present 
connexion, vv. 12, 13, where the ex- 
pression ^ father's near kinswoman,' 
and ' mother's near kinswoman,' is in 
the original * father's remainder,' and 
' mother's remainder;' (Heb "^^11^ sheer j 
remainder). So again, v. 17, ^ They are 
her near kinswomen (n^&^'J sheerah, her 
remainder).' It would seem, therefore, 
that the established version is not only 
true to the sense of the original, but 
also that the expression includes all 
the prohibited degrees which follow. 
They were all ' remainder of flesh ' to 
each other, and no language could con- 
vey the idea of closer relationship. The 
distinction, therefore, often much in- 
sisted on in the construction of this 
law, between consanguinity and affinity, 
seems not to be recognized at all by 
the Holy Spirit. To the same conclu- 
sion we shall probably be brought by 
a correct view of the intrinsic nature of 
the marriage relation, as instituted by 
God himself. ' By marriage,' says 
Blackstone (Com. B. I. ch. 15, and note), 
' the husband and wife are one person 
in law. Upon this principle of an union 
of person in husband and wife, depend 
almost all the legal rights, duties, and 



174 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



disabilities that either of them acquire 
by marriage. The same degrees by 
affinity are prohibited. Affinity always 
arises b}^ the marriage of one of the 
parties so related. As a husband is re- 
lated by affinity to all the consanguinei 
of his wife, and vice versa, the wife to 
all the husband's consanguinei ; for the 
husband and wife being considered one 
llesh, those who are related to the one 
by blood are related to the other by 
affinity. Therefore a man, after his 
wife's death, cannot marry her sister, 
aunt, or niece.' By pronouncing the 
parties that enter that connexion ' one 
flesh,' it would seem to have been the 
divine intention that marriage should 
be regarded, in the highest sense con- 
sistent with the distinct personality of 
the married, as constituting a construc- 
tive unity of being in man and wife. In 
confirmation of this we beg leave to in- 
troduce a note from a previous volume 
of this series of commentaries, on the 
words of the historian, Gen. 39. 10, rela- 
tive to the solicitations of Potipher's 
wife to Joseph ; ' And it came to pass, 
as she spake to Joseph day by day, that 
he hearkened not unto her, to lie by her, 
or to be with her.' ' This passage 
affords an instance of a very important 
shade of meaning being lost to the Eng- 
lish reader by the translators' not hav- 
ing adverted to, perhaps not being ac- 
quainted with, the genuine force of the 
original. When we read that Joseph 
refused to hearken to his mistress's soli- 
citations, or ' to be with her,' we natu- 
rally understand the meaning to be, 
that he declined being in her company, 
that he shunned her presence, and es- 
pecially that he avoided, as much as 
possible, being alone with her. All this 
may indeed have been so ; we think it 
very probable that it was ; still this 
does not by any means represent the 
true sense of the original phrase. The 
* or ' is not found in the Hebrew, and its 
insertion in our translation prevents the 
precise drift of the writer from being 
apprehended. The true rendering re- 



sults from the omission of the particle 
— ^ he hearkened not unto her to lie by 
her, to be with her ' — and the import of 
' being with her ' unquestionably is, 
being united, and as it were identified 
with her, so as in a sense to co-exist 
with her by a constructive reciprocation 
of being. This sense is clearly devel- 
oped by the words of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 
6. 16, 17, ' What? know ye not that he 
which is joined to an harlot is one body ? 
for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. 
But he that is joined to the Lord is one 
spirit.^ To be with one^ therefore, in this 
sense, is, in the eye of the Scriptures, 
to have a community of being. This is 
the nature of the conjugal union, which 
is trenched upon and invaded by every 
act of unlawful commerce, such as that 
meditated by Potiphar's wife.' 

If this be a well-founded view of the 
subject, we see not how to resist the 
inference, that a woman's father, mo- 
ther, brother, and sister, become by 
marriage, in the divine estimation, the 
father, mother, brother, and sister of 
the man whom she marries, and so vice 
versa. It may indeed be objected to 
this, as Nicodemus objected to the doc- 
trine of regeneration, that it is impossi- 
ble to see how it can be. But the ques- 
tion is, does not God say so ? And may 
he not, in the exercise of his sovereign 
authority, declare that such and such 
relations of a moral or covenant kind 
shall exist among his creatures, al- 
though they might seem to our short- 
sighted reason to contravene the laws 
of physical being? It will scarcely be 
denied, that notwithstanding the dis- 
tinct personality of each individual of 
the human race, there yet exists some 
kind of economical or federal union be- 
tween them and Adam, in consequence j 
of which their relations to law and ■ 
destiny are very materially affected. 
We see no necessity that such a rela- 
tion should be a matter of personal con- 
sciousness. It is sufficient that it is a 
matter of divine testimony, and the 
truth or the fallacy of the position is to 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



175 



! be determined by a fair and legitimate 
construction of the record on the true 
sense of which the whole matter rests. 

I So again it is clearly affirmed by the 
Apostle, Rom. 4. 11, 12, that there is a 
sense in which, to all that believe, 
Abraham becomes a father, though they 
be not of the circumcision, like his de- 
scendants after the flesh. This also is 
not a fact of personal consciousness, but 
of divine testimony, which we receive 
because, although the idea is one of ra- 
ther a subtle nature, we cannot set aside 
the evidence on which it rests. In like 
manner may it not be possible that 
within certain limits defined by God, 
the relations formed by affinity shall 
be just as near and as sacred as those 
resulting from consanguinity ? 

For ourselves we know of no more 
interesting view of the marriage union, 
than that it creates to each of the par- 
ties a new circle of endeared relatives, 
bound together by ties which are never 
henceforth to be sundered. What a field 
is here opened for the extension of the 
tenderest charities and the sweetest 
sympathies of his life ! What a multi- 
plication of the cords which, by binding 
firmly together, strengthen the great 
brotherhood of man ! This end is no 
doubt answered to a certain extent on 
the opposite theory, that the relation- 
ship with a wife's or husband's family 
ceases as soon as the one or the other is 
removed by death. But the tie will 
naturally be regarded of far slighter 
force when it is looked upon as merely 
temporary in its duration, and though 
a mutual friendly intercourse and inter- 
est may subsequently be kept up be- 
tween the families, yet it is nothing 
compared with the cem^ented fellowship 
that subsists between those who regard 
each other in the light of permanent 
kindred. 

It is also to be remarked, that the 
view now suggested of the nearness and 
sanctity of the marriage relation, would 
tend more powerfully perhaps than any 
other to counteract those lax and law- 



less sentiments in regard to that insti- 
tution, which are unhappily at all times 
too prevalent among men, and which 
generate a dangerous facility in the pro- 
curement of divorces. The convictions 
upon which the sacredness and stability 
of marriage rest, need to be reinforced 
by every legitimate collateral influence 
which can be brought to bear upon 
them ; and what can tend more to this 
than the consideration, that though the 
connexion itself might cease at death, 
yet the kindred created by it would sur- 
vive and live on undisturbed? — But we 
pass on to another department of our 
preliminary discussions. 

What is meant by the Phrase ^ to Un- 
cover Nakedness V 

This expression is evidently of the 
utmost importance in this connexion, as 
defining the criminal intercourse which 
is here forbidden. It is true, indeed, 
that the phraseology is occasionally 
varied in other parts of the law, as we 
find ' to approach to,' ' to liew^ith,' used 
as equivalents to the form of speech be- 
fore us. The first of these, ' to approach 
to,' occurs only in v. 6 and 14 of the 
present chapter, in both which cases it 
is obviously tantamount to having car- 
nal connexion with a woman. The 
second, ' to lie with,' in like manner, 
when employed without anj^ thing to 
qualify or limit its meaning, has ob- 
viously the generic sense of sexual in- 
tercourse, whether within or without 
the pale of matrimony. It can scarcely 
be necessary to show, by an array of 
particular citations, that the import of 
these phrases fairly includes the sexual 
intercourse supposed in the very idea of 
marriage, as well as the illicit com- 
merce to which the terms fornication 
and adultery are applied. 

The question returns, then, whether 
the expression before us, ^ to uncover 
nakedness,' is not used with equal lati- 
tude, including the conjugal intercourse 
of married parties, as well as the sexual 
connexion forbidden under the name of 



176 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



incestuous fornication and adultery, for 
which many contend as the only object 
of prohibition in the laws now under 
consideration. For ourselves, we are 
ready to admit that something more is 
prohibited in these chapters than merely 
incestuous marriages. Not only the 
import of the terms, but the obvious 
drift of the law, as indicated by the cir- 
cumstances under which it was promul- 
gated, convince us that it was intended 
to interdict in general the various kinds 
of promiscuous sexual commerce which 
had prevailed among the abandoned 
heathen, and at the same time to em- 
brace those incestuous marriage con- 
nexions to which many suppose the law 
has exclusive reference. But having 
made this admission, we again remark, 
that there is nothing in the form of the 
expression itself which precludes the 
sense of marriage connexions. What- 
ever else may be included in it, it is 
obvious that the sense of connubial in- 
tercourse is not necessarily shut out of 
its import. It is evidently a euphemis- 
tic mode of expression, to convey the 
idea of an act which the instinctive sen- 
timents of delicacy among all people 
agree to shroud in language th-at shall 
rather hint than declare. But let us 
refer to the actual usage. In the pre- 
sent chapter the phrase occurs thirteen 
times ; these instances it will not be 
necessary to cite. In the twentieth 
chapter, comprising, for the most part, 
a repetition of the precepts of this, with 
the annexed penalties, it occurs six 
times, but with no different shade of 
meaning. The next instance in which 
it occurs is found Is. 47. 2, 3, in an 
address to the ^ virgin daughter of Ba- 
bylon,' to whom it is said, ' Take the 
millstones and grind meal, &c. ; thy 
nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy 
shame shall be seen.' Here is barely 
the implication of unseemly exposure^ 
without any thing to aid ns in deter- 
mining the question of its drift in the 
connexion before us. The only remain- 
ing cases are the following, all occur- 



ring in Ezekiel. Ch. 16. 36, ^ Because thy 
filthiness was poured out, and thy na- 
kedness discovered (uncovered) through 
thy whoredoms with thy lovers,' &c. 
Here it is evident, from the context, 
that the allusion is to extra-conjugal 
licentiousness, of the grossest character. 
Thus again, v. 37, ' Behold, therefore, I 
will gather all thy lovers, with wliom 
thou hast taken pleasure, and all them 
that thou hast loved, with all them that 
thou hast hated ; I will even gather 
them round about against thee, and will 
discover (uncover) thy nakedness unto 
them, that they may see all thy r.aked- 
ness.^ This, of course, is not the un- 
covering that belongs to marriage. 
Ezek. 22. 10, ' In thee have they dis- 
covered (uncovered) their fathers^ na- 
kedness : in thee have they humbled 
her that was set apart for pollution.' 
This is entirely parallel to the use of 
the phrase in the chapter before us, and 
advances us no further towards a definite 
result. Ch. 23. 10, ' These discovered 
(uncovered) her nakedness : they took 
her sons and her daughters, and slew 
her with the sword.' There is no room 
to question the application of this lan- 
guage to the pollutions of illicit love. 
It is not a nuptial nakedness of which j1 
the prophet here speaks. Thus too " 
again, ch. 23. 18, ' So she discovered 
(uncovered) her whoredoms, and discov- 
ered (uncovered) her nakedness : then 
my mind was alienated from her.' 
Once more, ch. 23. 29, ' And they shall 
deal with thee hatefully, and shall take 
away all thy labor, and shall leave thee 
naked and bare ; and the nakedness of 
thy whoredoms shall he discovered (un- 
covered), both thy lewdness and thy 
whoredoms.' The nakedness here un- 
covered, is expressly said to be that of 
' whoredoms,' and consequently cannot 
be that of marriage. 

These are all the cases in which the 
phrase occurs in the Bible, and the gen- 
eral result will doubtless be admitted 
to be, that although it is incontestably 
applied in several of the cited cases to 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



177 



forbidden sexual intercourse, yet it is 
not equally indubitable that it is used 
to denote the lawful intercourse of wed- 
lock. At the same time, as there is 
nothing in the native import of the 
terms employed, which should necessa- 
rily forbid its being thus used, and as 
nothing can be pointed out in the cir- 
cumstances of its occurrence in the 
other cases which absolutely shuts us 
up to that as the only sense, we see not 
that any conclusive argument can be 
drawn from the terms of the law to re- 
strict its prohibitions simply to acts of 
adultery and fornication. At any rate, 
it will scarcely be questioned, that in 
V. 18, the expressioUj ' Thou shalt not 
take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to 
uncover her nakedness,' implies taking 
her in marriage, whether it be under- 
stood as before the death of th.e first 
wife or after. We observe moreover 
that the meaning of the terms is un- 
doubtedly to be viewed in connexion 
with the scope of the law, and in pro- 
portion to the strength of evidence that 
the law before us does not contemplate 
merely the general enormities of adul- 
terous intercourse, but the specific sin 
of incest in its several forms, in the 
same proportion is the certainty that in 
these passages the phrase in question 
conveys the idea of marriage. 

What then is the ground for believing 
that no other than the crimes that came 
under the category of general lewdness 
are here forbidden ? Can any suflicient 
reason be assigned, why the crime of 
adultery should here be forbidden with 
all this minute specification of cases, 
when it had been previously so expressly 
and so solemnly denounced by the terms 
of the seventh commandment ? As all 
are necessarily included in the scope of 
that prohibition, why does the lawgiver 
here forbid only those cases of adultery 
which may take place with a mother, 
step-mother, sister, half-sister, sister- 
in-law, &c. ' What would be thought,' 
says Mr. D wight, ' of the wisdom of a 
legislature which should enact a similar 



statute with regard to any other crime ; 

for example, that of horse-stealing : 

' He who steals the horse of any person 
shall be imprisoned three years. He 
who steals his father's horse, shall be 
imprisoned three years. He who steals 
his brother's horse^ shall be imprisoned 
three years. He who steals the horse 
of his father's brother, shall be impris- 
oned three years,' — and so on through 
a succession of thirty-three relations.' 
Again, it is not to be forgotten that the 
established punishment for adultery was 
death. How comes it then, if adultery 
is the grand offence interdicted in this 
law, that the penalty, in several in- 
stances, is merel)^ dying childless? On 
the whole, as any adequate reason for 
understanding solely the prohibition of 
adultery and fornication is wanting, 
and as the great mass of the Jewish 
and Christian world have agreed in 
interpreting these laws of incestuous 
marriages, it would seem that there are 
very strong grounds for this as the 
most legitimate construction. But 
though this be granted, still another 
question arises as to 

The Sense of the word ^ Wife ' in this 
Connexion. 

The position, as is well known, has 
been vigorously maintained, that as the 
word ^ wife ' and not ' widow ' is the 
word uniformly employed in these laws, 
they must therefore be understood as 
referring to women whose husbands 
were still living. But to this it may be 
replied, that Hebrew usage in respect 
to terms expressive of these relations 
must be regarded. The original word 
rendered ' wife ' is JllZ^JJ^ ishah, which 
is also the only term that the language 
affords for ' woman.' In like manner, 
the Gr. word ywrj signifies both ^ wo- 
man 'and ^wife.' In the Hebrew dic- 
tion a man's ^ wife ' is uniformly his 
* woman,' and nothing would be more 
natural, from the force of correct ideas 
on the subject of the marriage relation, 
than to speak of the surviving partner 



178 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



of a man deceased as his ' woman ' or 
' wife/ That this was actually the 
usage is obvious from numerous exam- 
ples. Thus Gen. 38. 8, ' And Judah 
said unto Oiian, Go in unto thy brother's 
wife, and marry her.' Deut. 25. 5, 

< The wife of the dead shall not marry 
without unto a stranger.' Ruth 4. 5, 

* Buy it of Ruth, the wife of the dead.^ 
2 Sam. 12. 10, ' Thou hast taken the 
wife of Uriah.' Matt. 22. 25, ' The 
first died and left his wife.^ Acts 5. 7, 
' Ananias' wife, not knowing that her 
husband was dead,' &c. 

Such was the common usage among 
the Hebrews, the Greeks, and the Ro- 
mans J and such is that of the French, 
the Germans, the Spanish, and the 
Italians, as well as of the English. In 
none of the versions of the Scriptures in 
these languages, is the word widow in- 
troduced in such cases. The Hebrew 
has indeed the word n5)3^&< almonah, 
signifying ividow, but it is never used, 
as with us, in such a connexion as ' the 
widow of such an one', — * the widow of 
a father, brother, son,' &c. Instead of 
this, the fixed phraseology in such cases 
is always ' wife.' Its use is most pre- 
valent in cases where the writer's object 
is to make the state of widowhood, as a 
state of desolation and weakness, pecu- 
liarly prominent. Thus Ex. 22. 22, 

* Ye shall not afflict any widow or child.' 
Deut. 14. 29, ^ The stranger, the father- 
less, and the widow shall come and eat 
and be satisfied.' Job. 24. 3, ^ They 
take the widow^sox for a pledge.' Such 
is the more common usus loquendi. 
Indeed, it is remarkable, that in several 
instances the word niUJ^ woman or wife, 
is subjoined to H^^D^fi^ almonah, widow, 
equivalent to * widow- woman' or 'widow- 
wife ' in our language. Both terms are 
in these cases generally translated in 
our rersion, though occasionally the 
latter is omitted. Thus, 1 Kings 7. 14, 

< He was a widow's son (re^Q^i^ HiZ^Jf^ "p 
ben ishah almonah, son of a widow-wife) 
of the tribe of Naphtali.' But wherever 
the phrase * widow- woman ' occurs, it is 



to be recollected, that according to the 
original idiom, ' widow-wife ' is an 
equally proper rendering. We cannot 
doubt, therefore, that while the term 
* wife ' in this connexion is really used 
with such an extension of its import as 
to embrace the idea of widow,' it would 
at the same time have been entirely 
contrary to the prevailing idiom of the 
language to have employed that term. 
The truth is, if we mistake not, the 
term ' wife ' in the different specifica- 
tions of the law before us, is so used as 
to express the continuity of the relation, 
without any regard to the fact of the 
husband's death. Whether he were 
living or dead, it mattered not ; the 
prohibition continued in full force ; and 
that not only from the common usage 
of speech, but from the nature of the 
propinquity already established between 
the barred parties. We do do not mean 
by this that the relation so continued 
after the death of either of the parties, 
as to make it unlawful for the survivor 
to marry again ; for in this particular, 
a dispensation was kindly granted, and 
the words of the apostle, Rom. 7. 2, 3. 
apply in all their force ; ' For the wo- 
man which hath an husband is bound 
by the law to her husband as long as 
he liveth ; but if the husband be dead, 
she is loosed from the law of her hus- 
band — so that she is no adulteress, 
though she be married to another man.' 
But we do not perceive that this annuls 
the relationships previously existing 
between those who are brought together 
by affinity, nor is there any fairness in 
quoting the apostle's words to such a 
purpose, as his drift was entirely differ- 
ent. Take for instance the case of the 
step-mother, the father's wife. What 
originally constituted the propinquity 
between her and her step-son, that ren- 
dered it unlawful for him to marry her? 
Plainly the fact, that the father had 
consummated marriage with her. In 
the language of the law she then be- 
came ' one flesh' with him. As soon 
as this became a fact, the propinquity 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVm. 



179 



became complete. How could the death 
of the father undo this pre-existent fact, 
and cauise the constituted relation be- 
tween the step-mother and the step-son 
to cease ? So as to a sister ; she does 
not lose the propinquity which she has 
in common with me, either at my fa- 
ther's death, or at her marriage ; be- 
cause her propinquity is founded on a 
pre-existent fact, which can never cease 
to be a fact. How then can we resist 
the inference, that the sister of a wife 
continues to be a sister, after the death 
of the wife, just as she was before, and 
consequently is 7ievej' to be approached 
in the nuptial relation ? Does the 
maxim admit of controversy, that any 
person, with whom, at any time, it 
would have been incest to cohabit, will 
forever remain forbidden? The ques- 
tion seems unequivocally determined 
by the principle of affinity arising out 
of the nature of the marriage union. 

Are these Laws still binding upon Chris- 
tians at the present Day ? 
This of course is a question of the 
utmost moment, in the present connex- 
ion. It is comparatively a matter of 
little consequence to ascertain whether 
the marriage in question was forbidden 
to the Jews, provided the statute re- 
specting it was among those portions 
of the law which have been abolished 
under the gospel. This latter position 
is of course most strenuously maintained 
by those who hold to the lawfulness of 
the marriage in question. By them it 
is contended that these laws are purely 
ceremonial, forming a part of that code 
which is abrogated by Christ, They 
occur, it is said, in the midst of enact- 
ments which are confessedly Levitical, 
and accompanied by no notes of dis- 
crimination which mark them out as 
having a moral and permanent authority. 
For aught that appears, they are no 
more binding on us than the precepts 
relative to wearing linsey-woolsey gar- 
ments, or sowing diverse seeds in the 
same field^ or raising a mixed breed of 



cattle. That code, as a code, has be- 
come to us antiquated, and if we receive 
certain of its moral precepts, it is not 
because we admit the authority of the 
Levitical law ; but because of their own 
intrinsic equity or wisdom. 

Again, it is affirmed, that if these 
enactments are binding upon us at this 
day, it must be because the connexions 
forbidden involve an essential immoral- 
ity. But in this case, God never would 
have sanctioned them under any cir- 
cumstances. Yet we perceive as a 
matter of fact, that the first marriages 
in the family of Adam must necessarily 
have been between brother and sister, 
so far at least as regards Cain and Abel, 
and probably Adam's other children. 
It was, moreover, an express statute, 
that in case that a brother died child- 
less, the surviving brother was not only 
permitted, but required to marry his 
widow. If such connexions then are 
intrinsically wrong, how could they 
have been allowed in the instances 
cited ? 

To this it is replied, on the other 
hand, that there is nothing of a ceremo- 
nial nature in the law regulating mar- 
riage connexions. The institution of 
marriage was intended, not for the Jews 
but for the whole world. As such, the 
laws by which its Author has seen fit 
to qualify, guard, and govern it, are 
binding alike upon all nations and in all 
times. These laws are contained in the 
chapters before us ; and if they are not 
now obligatory, then it follows that we 
have nothing in the compass of the 
whole Bible regulating the subject of 
marriage alliances — nothing to forbid a 
man marrying his own mother, sister, 
or daughter ! They occur, indeed, in 
the midst of a multitude of enactments, 
peculiar to the Levitical economy. But 
this is no more than holds good of a 
vast variety of other moral precepts, 
the universally binding nature of which 
no one questions. The moral law is 
indeed summarily comprised in the 
decalogue, yet the letter and spirit of 



180 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



this divine code are illustrated and con- 
firmed by subsequent explanatory pre- 
cepts, which are intermingled often in 
the same chapter, and sometimes in the 
same paragraph with the purely ritual 
or ecclesiastical laws. One has only 
to turn his eye over the three or four 
connected chapters in this book, to find 
the repeated occurrence of such pre- 
cepts as the following : — ' Thou shall 
love the Lord thy God with all thine 
heart, and with all thy soul, and with 
all thy might.' — ' Thou shall fear the 
Lord thy Godj him shall thou serve, 
and to him shall thou cleave, and swear 
by his name.' — ' Thou shall do that 
"vvhich is right and good in the sight of 
the Lord.' — ' Thou shall worship no 
other God.' — ' Ye shall keep my Sab- 
bath, and reverence my sanctuary.' — 
^ Thou shall not hate thy brother in thy 
heart.' — ' Thou shall love thy neighbor 
as thyself.' — ' Ye shall not afilicl any 
widow or fatherless child.' — ^ Thou 
shall not arrest judgment, thou shall 
not respect persons, neither taJie a gift.' 
— ^ That which is altogether just shall 
thou follow.' — ' Thou shall have a per- 
fect and just weight, a perfect and just 
measure shall thou have.' — ' Thou shall 
keep the commandments of the Lord 
thy God, to walk in his ways and to 
fear him.' 

No one can imagine for a moment 
that these precepts are ceremonial and 
binding on the Jews only. Many of 
them are expressly cited and applied in 
the New Testament. But if they were 
not, still their authority remains una- 
bated. The books of the Old Testa- 
ment are received by all Christians as 
inspired volumes, and they hesitate not 
to accept its moral and ethical code as 
equally binding with that of the New. 
As every other command of the deca- 
logue is recognized and fortified by par- 
ticular precepts here and there inter- 
spersed, the same may be expected, 
a priori, in regard to the seventh. That 
command preserved the honor of the 
marriage union after it was formed ; 



but it left many questions undecided 
respecting the parties who might law- 
fully enter wedlock. It was extremely 
important to. be made known whether 
the ordinance was left free, without any 
restraint or limits, or whether there 
were any prohibitions on the score of 
degrees of kindred. There must be a 
law somewhere in the Mosaic code to 
ascertain who may and who may not be 
united in marriage. Where shall thai 
law be found, if not in the chapters be- 
fore us ; and if found there, what reason 
can be urged for its having become ob- 
solete ? Are we to be driven to the 
alternative of admitting that we are left 
without a single passage or paragraph 
in the whole compass of revelation 
bearing upon the degrees of relationship 
within which marriage may or may not 
be contracted ? 

Again, the connexions forbidden in 
these statutes are those which are pro- 
nounced abominable in the depraved 
Canaanites and Egyptians. But what 
could have rendered incest a crime 
among these abandoned heathen ? They 
had not the written law, and where there 
is no law there is no transgression. If 
the prohibitory code was peculiar only 
to the Jews, what binding power could 
it have upon the Gentiles, who were 
strangers to the Jews ? What was the 
law which, in this matter, they had 
transgressed ? There surely must have 
been some flagrant infraction of the 
mandates of heaven, to draw down such 
dire denunciations, and such wasting 
judgments as are spoken of in this con- 
nexion. Vv. 24, 25, ' Defile not ye your- 
selves in any of these things : for in all 
these the nations are defiled which I 
cast out before you : and the land is de- 
filed : therefore I do visit the iniquity 
thereof upon it, and the land itself vom- 
ileth out her inhabitants.' What can 
account for the severity of this judg- 
ment but the fact, that in perpetrating 
these enormities, they were transgress- 
ing a moral code — a law which, as it 
was in force before the existence of the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



181 



Mosaic dispensation, so it is equally in 
force after it, even in our own land and 



all future 
no repeal 



time. That there has been 
of the law under the New 
Testament, is plain from the two in- 
stances which are mentioned but to be 
condemned. When John reproved Herod 
for taking his brother's Philip's wife, 
and lost his life for his fidelity, his de- 
nunciation was but an echo of the di- 
rect language of the word of God as 
here recorded ; and the horror ex- 
pressed by Paul at a man's taking his 
father's wife, an offence not so much as 
named among the Gentiles, goes une- 
quivocally to prove that he knew nothing 
of any abrogation of the law of incest. 
As to the objection brought from the 
case of marriages in Adam's family, 
and from that of the brother's widow 
who was childless, w^e adopt the reply 
given by Prof. Hodge (Bib. Rep. July, 
1842). 'It is obvious the argument 
proves too much. If the command that 
one brother should take the child- 
less widow of another brother as his 
wife, proves that it is not wrong for a 
man to marry his sister-in-law, then the 
command to the immediate sons of 
Adam to marry their sisters, proves 
that it is right now for brothers to marry 
their sisters. This objection is founded 
upon the confusion of two very different 
things. There are things which are 
inherently and essentially wrong, and 
can in no possible case be right ; as 
hatred of God and malevolence towards 
men. The prohibitions of such things 
arise out of the very nature of God, and 
are as immutable as that nature. But 
there are other things which are wrong 
only in virtue of a divine prohibition ; 
and this prohibition may be founded 
either on temporary considerations, or 
such as are permanent. But in either 
case, whenever the prohibition is re- 
moved or the opposite commanded, the 
guilt of the action ceases. It was a sin 
in any Israelite not to circumcise his 
child on the eighth day ; but if God 
commanded any one to defer the rite or 

16 



omit it altogether, it was of course his 
duty to comply. It was forbidden to 
the Hebrews to labor on the Sabbath, 
but in many cases, labor on that day 
was a duty. These are cases of positive 
commands. But further than this, it 
is sinful to take the property of others 
without their consent, but if God com- 
manded the Israelites to take the pro- 
perty of the Egyptians, it was right for 
them to do so. It is a sin to kill a hu- 
man being, yet God commanded the 
Hebrews to extirpate the Canaanites. 
We all admit that bigamy is a sin, but 
if any man will produce a command of 
God to marry two wives, no one will 
deny his right to do so. It is a sin for 
a brother to marry his sister, but if re- 
quired by a divine command, it is a sin 
no longer. Thus, also, if any one can 
produce a divine command to marry his 
sister-in-law, the lawfulness of the mar- 
riage will be readily admitted. All 
these commands belong to the same 
class ; they all express the will of God 
as to the duties of men in the permanent 
relations of society, and are therefore 
of permanent obligation ; yet any one 
or all of them may be set aside by him 
in whose hands are all his creatures, 
and whose nature and relations, and the 
resulting duties, may be modified at 
will. That an Israelite, therefore, un- 
der peculiar circumstances and for spe- 
cified reasons was commanded to marry 
his brother's wife, no more proves that 
the general law on this subject is not 
binding, than the command to Abraham 
to sacrifice Isaac proves that the com- 
mand, thou shalt not kill, is not moral 
and permanent. That the Levitical 
law of marriage is still binding upon 
us, Vv^e think is proved by what has 
already been said. It is the expression 
of the will of God in reference to rela- 
tionships which still exist among men. 
It tells us what is the duty of near rela- 
tives. It tells us that brothers and sisters 
must not intermarry, not because they 
were Jews, but because of their rela- 
tionship. It extends the prohibition to 



182 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



all who are near of kin, because they 
are near of kin. It is as much a law 
for us therefore as any other expression 
of the will of God. The binding au- 
thority of this law is recognized in the 
New Testament, just as the continued 
obligation of the original law of mar- 
riage is recognized. We find no express 
assertion that marriage must be between 
one man and one woman, but the ex- 
pression of the will of God at the crea- 
tion, is held to bind all ages and na- 
tions. Thus, though there is no ex- 
press declaration that near relatives 
must not marry, it is plain from the 
language of the apostle to the Corin- 
thians, that he considered the original 
revelation on this subject as still our 
rule of duty.' 

Do these Laws include Degrees not ex- 
pressly Specified ? 

The consideration of this question 
we may introduce in the words of 
Michaelis, subjoining his own opinion 
on it. 

' There arises the question. Whether 
Moses only prohibits the marriages 
which he expressly mentions, or others 
heside not mentioned, where the degree 
of relationship is the same ? This 
question, which is of so great impor- 
tance in the marriage-laws of Christian 
nations, and which from an imperfect 
knowledge of oriental customs his been 
the subject of so much controversy, pro- 
perly regards the following marriages, 
viz. : — 

1. With a brother's daughter. 

2. With a sister's daughter. 

3. With a maternal uncle's widow. 

4. With a brother's son's widow. 

5. With a sister^s son's widow. 

6. With a deceased wife's sister 

^ These marriages we may, perhaps, 
for brevity's sake, be allowed to denom- 
inate the six marriages y or the conse- 
quential marriages. They are as near 
as those which are prohibited. Moses 
never mentions them in his marriage 
statutes, yet the ground of his prohibi- 



tions is nearness of relationship. The 
question, therefore, is. Are these mar- 
riages to be or not to be considered as 
prohibited by just inference from the 
letter of his laws? 

' In my opinion they are not. 

* My reasons for denying and protest- 
ing against the conclusions are the fol- 
lowing : 

^ 1. Moses does not appear to have 
framed or given his marriage-laws with 
any view to our deducing, or acting 
upon conclusions which we might think 
fit to deduce from them : for if this was 
his view, he has made several repeti- 
tions in them which are really very 
useless. What reason had he, for ex- 
ample, after forbidding marriage with a 
father's sister, to forbid it also with a 
mother's, if this second prohibition was 
included in the first, and if he meant, 
without saying a v.^ord on the subject, 
to be understood as speaking, not of 
particular marriages, but of degrees? 

' 2. Moses has given his marriage- 
laws in two different places of the Pen- 
tateuch, viz. : in both the 18th and 20th 
chapters of Leviticus ; but in the latter 
of these passages we find only the very 
same cases specified which had been 
specified in the former. Now had they 
been meant merely as examples of de- 
grees of relationship, it v/ould have 
been more rational to have varied them ,• 
and if it had been said, for instance, on 
the first occasion. Thou shalt not marry 
thy father^ s sister, to have introduced, 
on the second, the converse case, and 
said, Thou shalt not marry thy hrother^s 
daughter. This, however, is not done 
by Moses, who in the second enactment 
just specifies the father's sister as be- 
fore, and seems, therefore, to have in- 
tended that he should be understood as 
having in his view no other marriages 
than those which he expressly names ; 
unless we choose to interpret his laws 
in a manner to his own meaning and 
design.' 

It can scarcely be maintained that 
there is any thing conclusive in either 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



183 



of these remarks. As to the repetitions, 
we need to know more respecting the 
actual condition and social usages of 
the peculiar people before we can pro- 
nounce them to be useless. So also as 
to varying the speciiicalions in the ISlh 
and 20ih chapters. We are not com- 
petent to say, a priori, what method of 
laying down these statutes was the 
most proper ; and we arc always upon 
dubious ground in holding it to be ' ra- 
tional to expect ' that the word of God 
should be constructed in any different 
manner from what it is. 

The fact is, that certain express pro- 
hibitions are contained in these chap- 
ters, and the question is, whether, on 
legitimate principles of interpretation, 
certain other prohibitions touching de- 
grees of kindred precisely similar are 
not also involved. As to the marriage 
with a deceased wife's sister, it is ad- 
mitted that we do not find it in so many 
words forbidden. But we find the par- 
allel case of the brother^s widow for- 
bidden, and as the relation is the same, 
it is contended that by parity of rea- 
soning the former also must be under- 
stood to be forbidden. The inference 
is held to be unimpeachable for the 
reason that the degree of relationship 
is the very ground of the prohibitions. 
A man must not marry his half-sister, 
because she is his sister ; a man must 
not marry his aunt, because she is the 
near relative of his father or mother ; a 
man must not marry his brother's w4fe, 
because she is so nearly related to his 
brother ; a man must not marry the 
daughter or grand-daughter of his wife, 
' because they are her near kinswomen ; 
it is wickedness.' Relationship to his 
wife is the very ground of the prohibi- 
tion. The law itself, therefore, both in 
its general statement, and in its partic- 
ular specifications, gives the rule of its 
own interpretation. It is the degree of 
kindred which the law itself teaches us 
is to be considered. Shall we say then 
that a marriage coming within the scope 
of any of these prohibitions, is not con- 



trary to the mind of God? Shall God 
say that two brothers shall not marry 
the same woman, because it is an un- 
clean and wicked thing for such near 
kindred as a brother-in law and asister- 
i in-law to marry ; and shall we say this 
law allows two sisters to marry the 
same man, although thereby a brother- 
in-law and sister-in-law intermarry? 
Are not two sisters as ' near of kin' to 
each other as two brothers are ? And 
is not a sister-in-law just as near of 
kin to her brother-in-law in the one case 
as in the other ? And is not nearness 
of kin the entire ground of all the pro- 
hibitions? 

Besides, the principle that no one 
is bound by any thing which is not 
expressly affirmed — that no construc- 
tive or inferential duties are taught in 
the Scriptures — would seem to be one 
that leads to the most dangerous results. 
If the principle of inference or impli' 
cation is not to be employed in the in- 
terpretation, then it follows that a man 
may lawfully marry his own daughter, 
for this is nowhere expressly forbidden. 
If inferences are not binding in the in- 
terpretation of the divine law, then we 
would ask for the express command 
which was violated by Nadab and 
Abihu in offering strange fire, and which 
cost them their lives ? Any prohibition 
in set terms on that subject will be 
sought for in vain. So again, did not 
our Saviour tell the Sadducees that they 
ought to have inferred that the doctrine 
of the resurrection was true, from what 
God said to Moses at the bush ? When 
it is expressly declared, moreover, that 
^ whosoever stealeth a man and selleth 
him shall surely be put to death,' is it 
an unfair inference that he that stole a 
woman or a child was to be subjected 
to the same punishment ? On the whole 
it seems necessary to admits that as the 
law makes nearness of kin the sole cri- 
I terion by which to determine whether a 
I given marriage be lawful or not, there- 
I fore if it declares a degree of nearness 
! of kin in any one case so great as to 



184 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



CHAPTER XVIIL 

AND the LoKD spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2 Speak unto the children of Is- 
rael, and say unto them, ^1 am the 
Lord your God. 

a ver. 4. Exod. 6. 7. ch. 11. 44, and 19. 4, 
10, 34, aud tiO. 7. Ezek. 20. 5, 7, 19, 20. 

render marriage unlawful, it virtually 
declares an equal degree of propinquity 
in another case to be an effectual bar to 
marriage. 

As the ensuing notes will resume the 
consideration of various details con- 
nected with the subject, it will be un- 
necessary to prolong our introductory 
remarks. To those who would extend 
their inquiries more minutely into the 
essential merits of the question, the 
following authorities may be indicated 
as covering very nearly the whole 
ground. Selden de Uxore Hebraica. — 
The Cases of Marriages between Near 
Kindred, particularly considered with 
respect to the Doctrine of Scripture, the 
Law of Nature, and the Laws of Eng- 
land. By John Fry. Lond. 1756 (a 
work of rare occurrence). — Pres. Ed- 
ward's (the Younger) Works, vol. 2. 
Serm. 7.— Rev. Dr. B. Trumbull's Ap- 
peal to the Public relative to the Un- 
lawfulness of Marrying a Wife's Sister. 
— Rev. Dr. J. H. Livingston's Disserta- 
tion on the Marriage of a Man with his 
Sister-in-law. — Christian Magazine, vol. 
4. p. 80, &c. A Brief Inquiry into the 
Lawfulness of Marrying a deceased 
Wife's Sister.— Rev. S. E. Dwight's 
Hebrew Wife ; or the Law of Marriage 
examined in relation to the Lawfulness 
of Polygamy, and to the Extent of the 
Law of Incest. — Marshall's Review of 
the preceding work of Dwight. — Rev. 
C. M'lvers's Essay concerning the Un- 
lawfulness of a Man^s Marriage with 
his Sister by Affinity. — To the above 
we may add two very able discussions 
of the subject in a more ephemeral 
form, both advocating the lawfulness 
of the marriage in question, the one 



3 b After the doings of the land 
of Egypt wherein ye dwelt, shall 
ye not do : and c after the doings 
of the land of Canaan whither I 
bring you, shall ye not do : neither 
shall ye walk in their ordinances. 

b Ezek. 20. 7, 8, and 23. 8. c Exod. 23. 24. 
ch. 20. 23. Deut. 12. 4, 30, 3L 



published in the New York Observer of 
Aug. 6, 1842, the other a series of six 
letters published in the New England 
Puritan, in the months of July and 
August, 1842. The report also of the 
discussions in the General Assembly 
of the Presbyterian Church of 1842, 
contained in the New York Observer of 
June 11, and in the Princeton Biblical 
Repertory of July, 1842, embody a 
large mass of valuable argument on the 
general subject, the substance of all of 
which is well worthy of being pre- 
served in more permanent form. 

General Preface to the Marriage Laws, 
1. Say unto them, I am the Lord your 
God. These words constitute the grand 
authoritative sanction of all the ensuing 
laws, implying that they respect a mat- 
ter of the utmost importance, one in 
which the honor and glory of the great 
God were most deeply involved. Al- 
though the God of all, he was in a spe- Jj 
cial and emphatic sense the God of the 
nation of Israel, with whom they were 
in covenant, whom they professed to 
serve, and to whom they were under 
the greatest obhgations imaginable. 
The phrase occurs six times in the pre- 
sent chapter, and still oftener in the 
next. 

3. After the doings of the land of 
Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not 
do. Heb. H:D5>)2D kemadseh, according 
to the doing or practising. Gr. Kara ra 
£TnTr]Sev[iaTa, according to the customs, 
usages, institutes. To what extent the 
crimes here forbidden prevailed among 
these heathen nations, may be learned 
from various intimations scattered here 
and there through the Scriptures, and 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



185 



4 dYe shall do my judgments, 
and keep mine ordinances, to walk 
therein ; I am the Lord your God. 

5 Ye shall therefore keep my sta- 

d Deut. 4. 1, 2, and 6. 1. Ezek. 20. 19. 
e Ezek. 20. 11, 13, 21. Luke 10. 28. Rom. 
10. 5. Gal. 3. 12. 

from the records of profane history. 
Upon these we cannot afford the space 
to dwell at any length 5 especially as it 
is more important for onr present pur- 
pose to call attention to the fact, that 
these nations, in committing these 
abominations, sinned. But against 
what law ? Where there is no law 
there is no transgression ; and as neither 
the Egyptians nor the Canaanites were 
in possession of the Mosaical code, it 
would seem to follow of necessity, that 
the practices here forbidden were vio- 
lations of some more primitive law than 
the ceremonial institute of the Jevrs ; 
and consequently that they, in being 
guilty of them, would be transgressing 
not merely a set of positive precepts 
delivered by the hand of Moses, but 
also that moral constitution v/hich had 
been in force from the earliest ages of 
the world ,• — in a word, that the m.ar- 
riages here forbidden were always re- 
garded as incestuous, and are therefore 

always unlawful. IT Neither shall 

ye walk in their ordinances. Heb. 
DH^ripra behukkothehem ; that is, their 
laws, statutes, or institutions ; for so 
are their iniquitous customs called, 
which by general prevalence and coun- 
tenance had become so inveterate, and 
so deeply rooted and grounded in the 
corrupt affections of all classes, that 
they had come to be regarded in the 
light, and to possess all the force, of so 
many laws and solemn institutions. 
This laid their abettors open to the woe 
denounced against those who ^ decreed 
unrighteous decrees, and who * framed 
mischief by a law.' Indeed, it is pos- 
sible that the w^ord may have respect to 
positive enactments ; yet whatever they 
may have been, the purport of the pre- 

!6* 



tutes and my judgments : e which 
if a man do, he shall live in them : 
f I am the Lord. 
6 If None of you shall approach 
to any that is near of kin to him, 

f Exod. 6. 2, 6, 29. Mai. 3. 6. 

cept to the Israelites is, ^ Do ye not 
after the manner of these nations, al- 
though their conduct may be allowed 
by the settled laws of their country ; for 
ye are not to regard their practices any 
the more justifiable on that account j' 
thus teaching us, that neither common 
usage nor statute law can sanctify that 
which is in itself vv^rong. 

4. Ye shall do my judgments, &c. 
Peculiar emphasis is here to be put 
upon the word ' mj^,' which is equiva- 
lent to ^ mine only ;' as the phrase 
' Him shalt thou serve,' Deut. 6. 13, is 
expounded by our Savior, ' Him only 
shalt thou serve,' Mat. 4. 10. 

5. Which if a man do he shall live in 
them. Ratherj ' shall live by them.' 
This the ancient versions and commen- 
tators generally understood as equiva- 
lent to • Shall have eternal life.' Thus 
the Chal. ' Shall live by them to life 
eternal.' So also Solom. Jarchi, ' Shall 
live in the world that is to come.' 
But as the term ' life,' ' living,' or ^ to 
live,' is frequently used in the Scrip- 
tures to denote living happily, prosper^ 
ously, and free from calamity, the prob- 
ability is, that it is to be so taken in the 
passage before us. He shall in conse- 
quence of this his obedience be favored 
to enjoy a long and happy life, whereas 
by disobedience he shall be exposed to 
be judicially cut off. The apostle con- 
trasts this legal promise made to works, 
with the gospel promise made to faith, 
Gal. 3. 11, 12. Rom. 10. 5-9. 

General Law of Incest. 

6. None of you shall approach, &c. 
Heb. in'npn J^i 'D^i^ ID"^^. ish ish lo 
tikrebu, man, man, ye shall not ap- 
proach ; i. e. none of you. The phrase 



186 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



to uncover their nakedness : I am 
the Lord. 
7 g The nakedness of thy father, 

S ch. 20. 11. 

is taken in a wide sense by the Tal- 
mudists, as equivalent to neither Jew 
nor Gentile ; for all mankind, they 
affirm, are comprehended under these 
laws of incest. Indeed the Karaite 
Jews, the most strenuous advocates for 
a strict interpetation, and the most 
decided opponents to Talmudical com- 
ments, insist upon this as the true 
sense. The original term is * approach,' 
frequently used by way of euphemism, 
to convey the idea of sexual intercourse, 
as in Gen. 20. 4, ^Abimelech had not 
come near (D^p 5<i lo karab) unto her.' 
Is. 8. 3, ' And I went in unto (l^p^ 
ekrah) the prophetess, and she con- 
ceived,' &c. Comp. Ezek. 18. 6. In 
the particular precepts following in this 
chapter and in the twentieth chapter, 
this prohibited intercourse is pointed 
out by the ph/ases ' to uncover the na- 
kedness,' ' to take,' and ' to lie with.' 
The first phrase therefore has the same 
meaning with each of the other three ; 
and they of course with each other. In 
Lev. 18. 14, the phrase ^ to uncover the 
nakedness ' is explained by the phrase 
* to approach to ;' in Lev. 20. IL by the 
phrase ^ to lie with,' and in Lev. 20. 21, 
by the phrase ' to take.* These four 
phrases then, as used in this law, have 
precisely the same meaning. And if it 
be asked how far that meaning extends, 
we answer, to every kind of sexual in- 
tercourse, but especially that of mar- 
riage. There is nothing in either of 
the above phrases which limits its ap- 
plication to fornication and adultery 
rather than to marriage ; and the gene- 
ral usage, as to the above phrases in the 
Scriptures abundantly confirms this po- 
sition. ' To uncover the nakedness ' is 
used in several instances (Lev. 18. 18, 
1 Sam. 20. 30, Is. 57. 8), to denote con- 
jugal intercourse, and the Heb. npi 
Idka'hj to takcy when connected with 



or the nakedness of thy mother, 
shalt thou not uncover : she is thy 
mother, thou shalt not uncover her 
nakedness. 

Ti'iD^ ishah, woman, or used absolutely, 
is the appropriate term for to marry a 

wife. ^ To any that is near of kin 

to him. Heb. 1lu:?n 'nj^Ii: prD ^5< el kol 
sheer besaro, to all (any) remainder of 
his flesh, implying that in the relations 
about to be specified the parties were, 
in the economy of heaven's institution, 
so intimately united or rather identified, 
that the one was, as it were, the remain- 
der of the other. In this case, there- 
fore, the Most High lays down this 
nearness of kin as the foundation of all 
the following prohibitions, and then 
proceeds to state and determine, by his 
own sovereign authority, between whom 
that nearness of kin subsists. In the 
interpretation of what follows it is im- 
portant to bear in mind, that although ■ 
these prohibitions are principally ad- f 
dressed to the man, yet they are equally 
binding upon the woman, who stands in 
the same degree of relationship. 

Incest forbidden with one''s own Mother. 
7. The nakedness of thy father, or 
the nakedness of thy mother. Heb. 
T\T\$ ervah, from PilS^ cirdh, to be made 
naked. Gr. aa^m^oawi']^ shame, uncome- 
liness. The particle or in this verse 
should undoubtedly be rendered ' even,' ■ 
as these words are designed to express 
a principle which lies at the foundation 
of this whole system of marriage laws: 
viz., that husband and wife are ptit for 
one and the same thing, are com,pletely 
identified ; ^ they being no more twain 
but one flesh.' This is clear from what 
follows, ' she is thy mother ;' showing 
that the mother's nakedness only is 
meant, though it is called the father's, 
as in Deut. 27. 20, ^ Cursed be he that 
lieth with his father's wife ; because he 
uncovereth his father's skirt,' i. e. his 
mother's. The nakedness of the one 
therefore is the nakedness of the other ; 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



187 



8 h The nakedness of thy father's 

1» Gen. 49. 4. ch. 20. 11. Deut. 22. 30, 
and 27. 20. Ezek. 22. 10. Amos 2. 7. 1 Cor. 
5. 1. 

and he that marries his wife's brother's 
daughter does the same thing as if he 
married his own brother's daughter. 
The crime of Lot's daughters was a 
transgression of the precept contained 
in this verse. The parallel passage in 
ch. 20. 11 J is, ' The man that lieth with 
his father's wife hath uncovered his fa- 
ther's nakedness ; both of them shall 
surely be put to death.' The Hebrew 
canonists say on this precept, ' He that 
lieth with his mother, and she his fa- 
ther's wife, is doubly guilty, whether it 
be while his father is living or after his 
death ; first, for that she is his mother, 
and secondly, that she is his father's 
wife.' — Maimonides in Ainsworth. It 
is to be remarked also that the Targum 
of Jonathan supposes the parallel case 
of the woman with her father to be im- 
plied ; — ^ The woman shall not he with 
her father, and the man shall not lie 
with his mother.' This is important, 
as indicating that the Jews considered 
the relations of the same degree as vir- 
tually included in each of these pre- 
cepts. What is forbidden to men is 
forbidden also to women standing in the 
same relation, though the former only 
are mentioned. 
According to the above, 
A Man may not marry his 

Mother, 

Daughter :* 
Nor a Woman her 

Son, 

Father. 

With a Step-mother. 
8. The nakedness of thy father^ s wife 
shall thou not uncover. This case dif- 
fers from the preceding only in its being 
designed to embrace one's step-mother^ 
as well as his own mother. The divine 
lawgiver would, by the most minute 

* The implied cases are italicized. 



wife shalt thou not uncover 
thy father's nakedness. 



It ts 



specification, preclude the possibility 
of mistake in regard to the meaning of 
a statute aimed against such a horrid 
impiety as a man's having illicit con- 
nexion with his mother. It was the 
incest here forbidden in this precept, of 
which Reuben was guilty with Bilhah, 
Gen. 35. 22, and Absalom with the 
wives of his father David, 2 Sam. 16. 
21 , 22. We learn also from the apostle, 
1 Cor. 5. 1, that this was a sin held in- 
famous by the very heathen. The He- 
brew writers speak thus on this subject : 
' A man's father's wife, and his son's 
wife, and his brother's wife, and his 
father's brother's wife, are unlawful for 
him for ever ; whether they be of the 
betrothed or the married, whether 
divorced or not divorced, whether their 
husbands be alive or dead j except in 
the case of the brother's wife who hath 
left no child, Deut. 25. 5. If he lie 
with any of them while her husband is 
alive, he is doubly guilty j first, in re- 
spect that she is of his near kin, and, 
secondly, that she is another man's 

wife.' — Maimonides. IT It is his 

father^s nakedness. That is, on the 
principle of constituted identity between 
the parties, as explained in the note on 
the preceding verse. This principle is 
recognized again in like manner in v. 14, 
where the uncovering of an uncle's na- 
kedness is explained as the ' approach- 
ing to his wife.' 

Results. 
A Man may not marry his 

Step-mother, 

Step-daughter, 

Daughter-in-law, 

Mother-in-law : 
Nor a Woman her 

Step-son, 

Step-father, 

Father-in-law, 

Son-in-law. 



188 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



9 i The nakedness of thy sister, 
the daughter of thy father, or 
daughter of thy mother, whether 
she be born at home, or born abroad, 
even their nakedness thou shalt not 
uncover. 

10 The nakedness of thy son's 

i ch. 20. 17. 2 Sam. 13. 12. Ezek. 2-2. 11. 

With a Sister. 
9. The nakedness of thy sister^ &c. — 
whether she he born at home, or born 
abroad, Heb. mjl^ 1i^ ^i^^ mil!^ 
Y"in moledeth bayith o moledeth hutz, 
the birth or offspring of the house, or the 
birth or offspring (from) abroad. Chal. 
* Which is begotten by the father, of 
another woman, or by the mother, of 
another man.' So Targ. Jon. 'Whom 
thy father hath begotten of another 
woman or of thy mother ; or whom thy 
mother hath borne by thy father or by 
another man.' The scope of the pre- 
cept undoubtedly is to forbid connexion 
between a brother and sister, whether 
such sister were born in lawful wedlock 
or out of it. The penalty annexed to 
this particular form of incest is thus 
stated, ch. 20. 17: * And if a man shall 
take his sister, his father's daughter, or 
his mother's daughter, and see her na- 
kedness, and she see his nakedness : it 
is a wicked thing ; and they shall be 
cut off in the sight of their people: he 
hath uncovered his sister's nakedness ; 
he shall bear his iniquity.' 
Results. 

A Man may not marry his 
Sister : 

Nor a Woman her 
Brother. 

With a Grand-daughter. 
10. The nakedness of thy son^s daugh- 
ter, &c. The connexion forbidden is 
too express to need any particular ex- 
planation. We may quote, however, 
the remark of Maimonides in respect to 
it ; — ' Whoso companieth w^th a woman 
(even) by way of fornication, and be- 



daughter, or of thy daughter's 
daughter, even their nakedness thou 
shalt not uncover : for theirs is thine 
own nakedness. 

11 The nakedness of thy father's 
wife's daughter, begotten of thy 
father, (shezs thy sister) thou shalt 
not uncover her nakedness. 



getteth a daughter of her, that daughter 
is forbidden to him in the name of his 
daughter. And though it be not said in 
the law, Thou shalt not uncover thy 
daughter's nakedness, yet this is be- 
cause it forbiddeth the daughter's daugh- 
ter ; therefore it keepelh silence con- 
cerning the daughter, which yet is for- 
bidden by the law (i. e. by the spirit of 
the law), and not by the scribes only.' 
Other Rabbinical writers hold the same 
language. They say that incest with a 
man's own daughter is not prohibited, 
because it would be irresistibly inferred. 
If a grand-daughter, standing in a de- 
gree more remote from him, is forbid- 
den to his approach, surely his own 
daughter must in the nature of the case 
be prohibited. And if it could be said 
of a son's or daughter's daughter, ' Her's 
is thine own nakedness,' how much 
more emphatically could it be said of 
an own daughter ? 

Results. 
A Man may not marry his 

Grand-daughter, 

Grand-mother : 
Nor a Woman her 

Grand-faiher, 

Grand-son. 

With a Half -sister by the Father^ s side, 
11. The nakedness of thy father^ s 
wife^s daughter, begotten of thy father. 
Heb. ^'ini^ ti'l^'^^ moledeth abika, the 
birth, generation, or offspring of thy 
father, the same word as that rendered 
' born,' in v. 9. It is by no means an 
easy matter to determine the precise 
point of difference between the prohi- 
bition in this verse and that in v. 9. 
Perhaps we can hit upon no construction 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



1S9 



12 ^ Thou shalt not uncover the 
nakedness of thy father's sister : 
she is thy father's near kinswoman. 

13 Thou shalt not uncover the 
nakedness of thy mother's sister : 



k cli. 20. 19. 



nearer the truth than the following : — 
The 9th verse contains a general pre- 
cept forbidding a man to marry his sis- 
ter, either ' the daughter of his father 
born at home/ i. e. his sister-german,or 
full sister, by father or mother ; or ' the 
daughter of his mother, born abroad ;' 
i. e. his half-sister by the mother's side, 
and by another father. In the 11th 
verse a man is forbidden to marry a 
half-sister by his father's side. The 
Gr. understands by the sister here men- 
tioned, aSeXcpr) bixoTrarpia^ a sister by the 
same father^ and with this the Chal. 
agrees. After all we must leave the 
matter involved in a considerable de- 
gree of obscurity, as does Michaelis, 
who suggests that it may perhaps be 
intended as an illustration of v. 9, and 
that it was inserted with a view to de- 
scribe the marriage in which Abraham 
lived in different words, and to prohibit 
it a second time, lest, by reference to 
Abraham's example, the first statute 
should have been falsely explained. 
For the Results see under v. 9. The 
two passages together forbid marriage 
between a brother and a sister, both of 
the whole and the half-blood. 

With a Paternal Aunt. 
12 Thou shalt not uncover the naked- 
ness of thy father^s sister. Whether 
we are to understand here the full sis- 
ter only or the half sister also, is a 
matter left undecided. By the Jewish 
commentators, both are held to be in- 
cluded, and they maintain also that it 
made no difference whether she were 
legitimately or illegitimately begotten 
by his grandfather. Selden informs us 
that such marriages were prohibited by 
the ancient R-omans, although it would 
seem that, previous to the Mosaic law, 



for she is thy mother's near kins- 
woman. 

14 1 Thou shalt not uncover the 
nakedness of thy father's brother, 
thou shalt not approach to his wife : 
she is thine aunt. 

1 ch. 20. 20. 



they were at least occasionally practised 
by the Hebrew nation, for it is generally 
admitted that Moses himself was the 
offspring of this very connexion between 
his father Amram and his aunt Joche- 

bed, Ex. 6. 20. ^ She is thy father's 

near kinswoman. Heb. i^in ^^35< ^i<1D 
sheer abika hi, she is thy father's re- 
mainder. Gr. oiKCia yap rarpog aov ecrij 
she is the domestic (relation) of thy 
father. So near, that as he could not 
be permitted to marry her, so the like 
interdict was laid upon his son also, 
who was but little further removed. 
And for the same reason that a man 
could not lawfully marry his aunt, it 
seem.s also to follow that he could not 
marry his niece — a principle of inter- 
pretation on the justness of which we 
have already remarked. 

Results. 
A Man may not marry his 

Aunt, 

Niece : 
Nor a Woman her 

Nephew, 

Uncle. 

With a Maternal Aunt, 

13. Thou shalt not uncover the na- 
kedness of thy mother's sister. For this 
the reason is the same as for the former 
prohibition ; the aunt by the mother's 
side being as near as the aunt by the 

father's. ^ She is thy mother's near 

kinswoman. Heb. Jj^lH y2i< ^i<1D sheer 
immeka hi, she is thy mother's remain- 
der. Gr. OLKZia yap [xvrpog aov earij she 
is the domestic (relation) of thy mother. 

Results. 
Same as under preceding verse. 

With a Paternal Uncle^s Wife. 

14. Thou shalt not uncover the na- 



190 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



15 m Thou shall not uncover the 
nakedness of thy daughter-in-law : 
she is thy son's wife, thou shalt not 
uncover her nakedness. 

m Gen. 3S. 18. 26. ch. 20. 12. Ezek. 22. 11. 

kedness of thy father^s brother. That 
is, as appears from what follows, of thy 
father's brother's wife ; called his na- 
kedness, because man and wife are con- 
sidered and termed ' one flesh.' See 
Note on v. 8. By parity of reasoning, 
it is to be inferred, that the uncle was 
precluded from marrying his brother's 
daughter. The Hebrew canonists also 
maintain that although the father^s 
brother's wife only is mentioned, yet 
the prohibition fairly embraces the mo- 
therms brother's wife in like manner. 

IT Thou shalt not approach. Heb. 

!l1pri &<i lo tikrdb. Gr. ovk SKxeXevffr), 
thou shalt not go in unto ; i. e. have 
carnal connexion with. 
Results. 
A Man may not marry his 

Uncle's Wife, 

Wife's Niece, 

Nephew's Wife, 

Wife's Aunt. 
Nor a Woman her 

Husband's Nephew, 

Aunt's Husband f 

Husband's Uncle, 

Niece's Husband. 

With a Daughter-in-law. 
15. Thou shalt not uncover the na- 
kedness of thy daughter-in-law. The 
Heb. il^^ kalldh is in several instances 
elsewhere used to signify a spouse or 
bride, and it is here rendered by the Gr. 
pvfji(pr]j of the same signification. But 
the next clause makes it clear that 
' son's wife ' is meant, on which relation 
see Note on v. 8. It mattered not, ac- 
cording to the Rabbins, whether she 
had been fully married to the son, or 
only espoused ; or whether she had 
been married, and been afterwards di- 
vorced. Under any circumstances, she 
was unlav/ful to him. The prohibition 



16 n Thou shalt not uncover the 
nakedness of thy brother's wife : 
it is thy brother's nakedness. 

n ch. 20. 21. Matt. 14. 4. See Deut 25. 5, 
Matt. 22. 24. Mark 12. 19. 



With the penalty is thus repeated, Lev. 
20. 12, ' And if a man lie with his daugh- 
ter-in-law, both of them shall surely be 
put to death : they have wrought con- 
fusion j their blood shall be upon them.' 
Results. 
See under v. 8. 

With a Brother's Wife. 

16. Thou shalt not uncover the na- 
kedness of thy brother's wife. This 
prohibition is repeated ch. 20. 21, with 
the annexed penalty as follows, ' And 
if a man shall take his brother's wife, 
it is an unclean thing : he hath uncov- 
ered his brother's nakedness ; they shall 
be childless.' This law is of course to 
be understood with the exception, that 
if the deceased brother died childless, 
it was not only lawful for the surviving 
brother to marrry the widow, but he 
was obliged to do it, or incur the penalty 
of being publicly disgraced in the eyes 
of all Israel, Deut. 25. 5-10. 

The consideration of the present pre- 
cept becomes, as is well known, ex- 
tremely important, from its connexion 
with the question respecting the lawful- 
ness of marriage with a deceased wife's 
sister. The leading principles involved 
in the discussion of this subject have 
been already adverted to in our prefatory 
remarks, and the general result to 
which we have been brought stated. 
The parallel marriage, it is certain, is 
not forbidden in so many terms • neither 
is it expressly forbidden that a man shall 
marry his own daughter or his grand- 
mother. But who will deny that a man 
in doing this would be sinning against 
God, or, in other words, acting contrary 
to the divine will? The decision of 
the question evidently rests on the truth 
or falsity of the position, that the pre- 
cept expressly naming and prohibiting 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVm. 



191 



17 o Thou shalt not uncover the 



ch. 20. 14. 



any particular degree of relation must 
be understood to comprise all relations 
within the same degree. In the present 
case the prohibition, v. 16, against mar- 
rying a brother^s wife, is founded solely 
on the relation existing between the 
parties ; and as the relation in the sup- 
posed case is precisely the same, with 
the exception only of the change of the 
sex, it is not easy to conceive what rea- 
son shall be assigned why the one is 
not equally forbidden with the other. 

It is indeed affirmed, that as this law 
is subject to the exception mentioned 
Deut. 25. 5-10, 'If brethren dwell to- 
gether, and one of them die, and have 
no child, the wife of the dead shall not 
marry without unto a stranger ; her 
husband's brother shall go in unto her, 
and take her to him to wife,' &c. ; there- 
fore this enactment virtually rescinds 
the whole precept against marrying a 
sister-inJaw. But to this it may be re- 
pliejd, that an exception to a general 
law, or a proviso in a particular case, is 
never considered as a repeal of the law. 
but a confirmation of it in all other 
cases in v/hich there is no exception nor 
proviso. They are only a suspension 
of the law in the particular cases spe- 
cified, and cannot extend to other cases, 
much less to the whole law to w^hich 
they relate. The statute in Deut. 25, 
is not intended to ascertain the degrees 
of kindred within which marriages are 
prohibited ; this is unequivocally done 
in the chapter before us. The only 
object of the exception is expressly 
mentioned. A brother is directed to 
marry the widow of his deceased bro- 
ther in a certain emergency. The bro- 
ther must have died without male issue. 
Had the deceased left a son, the gene- 
ral law of incest would have rendered a 
marriage wnth his widow as incestuous 
as with any other woman near of kin. 
The exception was evidently local in 
Its nature, and restricted to the the- 



nakedness of a woman and her 
daughter, neither shalt thou take 

ocracy. It was enacted for the express 
purpose of preserving families and in- 
heritances unbroken until the Messiah 
came. Whatever, then, might be the 
scope or operation of the exception, it 
must necessarily expire with the the- 
ocracy, leaving the moral part of the 
precept in its full force. But the Le- 
vitical code has long since answered its 
ends, and is abolished. This particular 
feature of the law is therefore no longer 
binding ; nor is a similar case at all 
possible under the New Testament. 
Consequently it does not appear that 
any sanction can be adduced from this 
law for the marriage in question. Chris- 
tians w^ould seem to be imperatively 
barred from marrying a sister-in-law, 
w^ho has been the wife of a deceased bro- 
ther, and still more a sister-in-law who 
is the sister of a deceased wife, to whom 
the exception in Deut. never did, and in 
the nature of things never could apply. 
The conclusion, therefore, would seem 
to be unavoidable, that there is nothing 
in the law of Deut. 25. which invali- 
dates the moral nature and perpetual 
obligation of the law forbidding mar- 
riage with a deceased wife's sister — 
nothing which in any form or degree 
can be binding upon Christians under 
the New Testament dispensation — and 
nothing in the letter or spirit of that 
precept which has the least reference to 
the question before us. 
Results. 
A Man may not marry his 

Brother's wife. 

Wife's sister : 
Nor a Woman her 

Husband's brother, 

Sister's husband. 

With a Step-Laughter or a Grand- 
daughter. 
17. Thou shalt not uncover the na- 
kedness of a woman and her daughter. 
Heb. niTijI niL'^ ni'lS? ervath ishah 



192 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



her son's daughter, or her daugh- 
ter's daughter, to uncover her na- 
kedness : for they are her near 
kinswomen : it is wickedness. 



u-bittah. The phraseology here is pe- 
culiar, and would seem at first blush to 
forbid a particular form of polygamy, 
or perhaps some single incestuous act. 
Indeed we are not prepared to say that 
this may not be intended. It may pos- 
sibly have been designed to inspire a 
horror of conjoint cohabitation with 
mother and daughter at the same time. 
But an equally just sense undoubtedly 
is, that one was not at liberty, upon the 
death of his wife, to marry her daugh- 
ter (not his own), and as a mother and 
daughter are ^remainder of flesh' to 
each other, the marrying of the daugh- 
ter, even after the death of the mother, 
was a species of marrying both at once, 
and therefore the copulative ' and ' is 
employed — ' a woman and her daugh- 
ter.' Upon this class of connexions, 
Maimonides writes thus ; — ' When a 
man marrieth a woman, there are six 
women of her kin unlawful to him for- 
ever, whether his wife live with him or 
be divorced j whether she be alive or 
dead : and ihey are these — her mother, 
and her mother's mother, and her fa- 
ther's mother, and her daughter, and her 



hter, and her son's 



daughter's dau^ 
daughter. And if he lie with any of 
these while his wife liveth.bothof them 
are to be burned.' — Ainsworth. The 
punishment of burning in such a case is 
expressly enacted, ch. 20. 14, where it 
will be observed that the original word 
here rendered ' woman,' is there ren- 
dered ' wife.' ' And if a man take a 
wife and her mother, it is wickedness : 
they shall be burnt with fire, both he 
and they : that there be no wickedness 

among you.' If It is wickedness. 

Heb. JKin H?2t zimmdh hi. The origi- 
nal word is highly emphatic, denoting 
properly nefarious wickedness. It is 
indeed defined in the Lexicons to sig- 



18 Neither shalt thou take a wife 
to her sister, p to vex her, to un- 
cover her nakedness, besides the 
other, in her life-time. 

P 1 Sam. 1. 6, 8. 

nify thought or purpose, but the import 
is that of thought or counsel of an atro- 
cious character involving some signal 
enormity. The Gr. has for it aaePrjixa, 
an impiety, an act of gross ungodliness, 
from which God would have his people 
shrink back with horror. 

Results. 
A Man may not marry his 

Step-daughter, «• 

Wife's grand-daughter: m 

Nor a Woman her 

Step-son, 

Husband's grand-son. 

With a Wife's Sister. 
18. Neither shall thou take a wife to 
her sister, to vex her, &c. A passage 
of great difficulty, and yet of great im- 
portance in its bearing on the question 
of marriage with a deceased wife's sis- 
ter, which we have made so prominent 
in our previous annotations. It is well 
known that the advocates of such mar- 
riages contend that this verse, by ne- 
cessary implication (which in this case 
it seems they readily admit, though re- 
jecting it in every other), contains an 
unequivocal intimation of their lawful- 
ness, as Ihey construe the precept thus: 
' Thou shall not take another wife, who 
is the sister of thy first wife, to vex her, 
to uncover her nakedness beside the 
other, in her life time ; although thou 
mayest take such a sister for a wife 
after the death of thy first wife.' As 
this construction completely overthrows 
the force of all the reasonings adduced 
on the other side, it demands a very 
rigid examination ; and upon this we 
enter by adverting to the form of ex- 
pression in the original. A hint of 
this is given to the English reader by 
the marginal rendering — ^ one wife to 
another,' for which many contend as 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVm. 



193 



the only true version. The Heb. has 

npn J5<^ nm^ ii^ n tJi^ ishah el a'hotMh 
lo tikka^h, a wife, or woman, to her sis- 
ter thou shalt not take. As to the 
meaning of the separate terms there is 
no doubt. It is admitted on all sides 
that niD5^ ishah means ^ woman ' or 
^ wife/ ^5^ el, to, and nrinfi< a^hothdh, 
sister. But it is not clear what the 
words import when taken altogether, 
as we find the phrase nSnnj^ ^5^ utZ;5^ 
ishah el a^hothdh used idiomatically to 
signify the adding of one thing to ano- 
ther, as is also the corresponding phrase 
I^Hi^ ^5^ li^i^ ish el a'hiv, a man to his 
brother. Of these phrases the former — 
* a man to his brother ' — occurs twenty- 
five times in the Hebrew scriptures, 
and the latter — * a woman to her sister ' 
— ten times. Neither of the phrases 
are confined to persons ; they are both 
frequently, and in fact generally, spoken 
of inanimate substances as will appear 
from the citations which we give, in- 
cluding all the important instances. 

(1.) T^ni^ ii*: iD'^i^ 

A man to his brother . 

Gen. 37. 19, * And they said one to 
another, {^'^H^ Ji^ tD^J^ a man to his 
brother).^ 

Ex. 25. 20, ^ And the faces of the 
cherubim shall look one to another 
(1"ini^ i5< 'S'^i^ a man to his brother.)' 

Ex. 37. 9, ' The cherubim stood with 
their faces one to another (pj!^ ID""^^ 
"T^rii^ a man to his brother).^ 

Jer. 13. 14, ^And I will dash them 
one against another (I'^HS^ Ji< "Hj"^^ a 
man to his brother).^ 

Jer. 25 26, ' And all the kings of the 
north one with another (T^Hi^ Ji^ 115*^5^ 
a man to his brother).^ 

Ezek. 24. 23, ^ And mourn one towards 
another (l*^n^ 5^ ^23*^5^ a man to his 
brother).' 

In addition to the above we find, in 
the masculine form, several equivalent 
modes of expression slightly varying 
from that now given ; as I'^H^ iTlfi^ ID'^}^ 
ish eth a'hiv, a man his brother, i. e. 
17 



one another ; l^^ni^ls '23'^i^ ish ked^hiv, 
a man as his brother, i. e. one man as 
another ; I'^ns^l 'O'^i^ ish ved'hiv, a man 
and his brother, i. e. one man with 
another; l^n^^IO lD^i< ish med^hiv, a 
man from his brother, i. e. one man 
from another ; I'^llJi^ ID'^l^ ish d'hiv, a 
man his brother, i. e. one man another ; 
^^Tli< i)5??2 'tD^'i< ish m,eal d^hiv, a man 
from his brother, i. e. one from another ; 
l^ns^^ llj'^i^ ish led^hiv, a man to his 
brother, i. e. one to another. The usage 
in these cases is too obvious to need 
remark j but we are more especially 
concerned with the feminine form, 
which we now proceed to illustrate. 

(2.) nnnfi^ ii^ ntrfi^ 

A Woman to her Sister. 

Ex. 26. 3, ' The five curtains shall 
be coupled together one to another 
ilT\TM< i^ nilji< a woman to her sister) ^ 
and other five curtains shall be coupled 
one to another (TltTl^ ^5^ ni25J5< a wo- 
man to her sister).^ 

Ex. 26. 5, ' That the loops may take 
hold one of another (ntTi^ ^5< niI35^ a 
woman to her sister).^ 

Ex. 26. 6. ^ And couple the curtains 
together (ntiTi^ ^^ n'lL^^ a woman to 
her sister).^ 

Ex. 26. 17. ' Two tenons shall be set 
one against another (nr.nj^ p^ nTD^ a 
woman to her sister) .' 

Ezek. 1.9, and 11. ' Their wings were 
joined one to another (nriTiiK "^^ HtL'J^ 
a woman to her sister) .' 

Ezek: 1. 23, ^ And their wings were 
straight one towards another (H^JS^ 
nriHi^ i^ a woman to her sister) .' 

Ezek. 3. 10, < The v^dngs of the living 
creatures touched 07ie another (JllDi^ 
nrni^ Jjj^ a woman to her sister) .' 

These are all the instances, except 
the present, where the phrase niZJfi^ 
nriHi^ 5^ a wife to her sister occurs, 
and it will be observed that in every 
one, except the case before us, the ren- 
dering in our translation is one to anO' 
ther, together, or some phraseology 
wholly equivalent. In no other in- 



194 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



stance do we meet with the literal ver- 
sion, a wife or woman to her sister. So 
in the twenty-five instances of the mas- 
culine form, the rendering of our trans- 
lators is uniform, one to another ^ whe- 
ther spoken of persons or things. In 
no case do we find any reference to 
relationship by blood. The question 
therefore arises whether the literal ver- 
sion in this place, involving, as it does, 
a departure from common usage, is 
warranted. It is admitted that the 
thirty-four indisputable cases in which 
this mode of speech occurs in an idio- 
matic sense go very far to establish this 
as in all cases the genuine significa- 
tion of the phrase. It would seem, at 
first view, that such an overwhelming 
mnjority of instances would be com- 
pletely decisive of the point in dispute ; 
and yet we cannot but concede that 
there is in this one case very great rea- 
son to doubt. For it will be observed 
that in every other instance, not only 
are the things which are to be added to 
each other inanimate objects of the 
feminine gender, but the subject of dis- 
course is first mentioned, and by that 
is the import of the phrase governed. 
If we take the expression here accord- 
ing to its import in every other case in 
which it occurs, we shall be obliged to 
render the verse, < Thou shalt not take 
one to another to vex,' &c. One what ? 
— it might properly be asked. If it be 
said, one woman, this is immediately 
giving a new latitude to the phrase be- 
yond what it idiomatically implies ; 
and yet its force as an idiom is all that 
is relied upon in proof of its referring 
not to a sister, but to any other woman. 
The principles then of a fair exegesis 
would seem to compel us, if we under- 
stand woman or wife by tltjH^ ishah, to 
understand sister by ninn&^ d'hoihah. 
Again, it appears that in every other 
case the phrase has a reciprocal import ; 
that is, a number of things are said to be 
so and so one to another. But here we 
perceive nothing of this. There is no 
trace of mutual, reciprocal action or 



relation." It is simply taking one ob- 
ject in addition to another, and leaving 
the whole phraseology utterly imperfect 
as compared with the Hebrew usage. 

We cannot but think, therefore, that 
' a wife to her sister ' is the appropriate 
rendering in this place ; and it is not a 
matter of small weight in confirmation, 
that all the ancient versions, as the 
Chal. Targ. of Onkelos, the Samaritan, 
the Syriac, and the Arabic, adhere to 
the literal construction. The Greek 
of the Seventy also, which elsewhere 
renders the Heb. phrase by one to ano- 
ther, here has ywaiKa ctt' adeXcpt] ov Xrjxprjj m 
a woman to her sister thou shalt not " 
take. At the same time, the advocate 
for the idiomatic interpretation has a 
right to demand a probable reason for 
the change of diction observable in this 
verse, when compared with the preced- 
ing. Why does it not commence with the 
formula ni^lH ^'i ^t^tim HlDi^ m^5> 
ervath eshah vea^hothah lo tegalleh, the 
nakedness of a wife and her sister thou 
shalt not uncover ? To this it is per- 
haps a satisfactory answer, that the 
writer wished to introduce the terms for 
' uncovering nakedness ' in a little dif- 
ferent relation in the subsequent part 
of the verse, and so to connect them 
with other words as to form a strong 
dissuasive against the union forbidden. 
On reading the verse entire we should 
dvoubtless find it extremely difiicult to , 
hit upon any mode of expression so 
well adapted to convey the sense in- 
tended as that which actually occurs, 
and this is Avhat necessitated a depart- 
ure from the fixed phraseology that runs 
through the other precepts, because we 
have here not the precept only, but an 
argument to enforce it — an argument 
drawn from the effects of such a mar- 
riage upon domestic happiness. The 
lawgiver, in the other verses, speaks for 
the most part the language of simple 
absohite authority ; in this he hints at a 
reason for his comimand. We might 
expect, therefore, a slight change in the 
form of speech. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



195 



But although we feel constrained to i 
give up the argument drawn from the 
Hebre w zcfio?7i, and usually applied in this 
connexion to convert the passage before 
us into a direct prohibition of polygamy, 
and therefore as having nothing to do 
with the question of the disputed mar- 
riage ; and though we cannot in fair- 
ness avoid admitting that the connexion 
here forbidden is marriage with a wife's 
sister ; yet we do not for that reason feel 
laid under any necessity of admitting 
the inference which is so commonly 
drawn from the final clause of the verse. 
' Neither shalt thou take a wife to her 
sister, to vex her, to uncover her naked- 
ness, besides the other in her life-time.^ 
From this, it is said, the implication is 
palpable, that the obligation of the law 
is limited by the life time of the first 
wife, and that upon her decease there is 
no bar to the husband's marrying her 
sister. This we must regard as a gross 
non sequitur. The expression ^ in her 
life time ' is too slight to be allowed to 
vacate the force of all the considerations 
which we have before adduced in proof 
of the implied prohibitions contained 
in the preceding verses. If the infer- 
ence which we have shown to be dedu- 
cible from v. 16 be intrinsically sound, 
it cannot be set aside by any expression 
in the verse before us ; for there is no- 
thing here more certain than we have 
found above. At the very utmost it is 
merely setting one inference against 
another. The genuine import of the 
phrase ' in her life time ' in this con- 
nexion undoubtedly is, as long as she 
liveSj without the least implication of 
any thing that is to follow, or that may 
follow. You are not to take a step 
which will be sure to embitter the lot 
of the first wife during the whole pe- 
riod of her life. The consequence of 
your rashness, or indiscretion, or ma- 
levolence, will be, that she will know 
peace no more as long as she lives. 

But what, it may be asked, is the real 
scope of the precept ? Is it a direct 
and categorical prohibition of polyga- 



my? To this we are for ourselves con- 
strained to answer. No. Although po- 
lygamy was essentially contrary to the 
genius of the marriage institution, and 
never truly sanctioned by the Most 
High, yet it was evidently tolerated^ 
and the divine legislation not only re- 
cognized its existence, but provided 
against its abuses. If the text in ques- 
tion contains a positive prohibition of 
that sin, the good men of Israel must 
have known it. Whatever ambiguity 
it may have to us, it could have none 
to them ; and can it be supposed that 
David, for instance, knew there w^as 
such a law, and yet spent his life in 
open violation of it? ^ Again,' says 
the author of an able series of articles 
on this subject in the N. E. Puritan, 
^ we show that polygamy is not prohib- 
ited in this text by a plain reductio ad 
dbsurdum. For in the first place, if that 
be the sin forbidden, it is a sin whose 
penalty is death. For after completing 
the series, the lawgiver says, ' Whoso- 
ever shall commit any of these abomi- 
nations, even the souls that commit 
them, shall be cut off from among the 
people? That these terms import pun- 
ishment by death is indisputable. Now 
suppose the crime thus threatened, to 
have been that of marrying two wives. 
Then we have the absurdity of an ex- 
press law against bigamy, declaring 
that bigamists shall be punished with 
death ; and then afterwards a law re- 
quiring all bigamists to make a fair dis- 
posal of their estates among the children 
of their two wives. For in Deut. 21 . 15, 
we read ] ' If a man have two wives, 
one beloved and the other hated, and 
they have borne him children, both the 
beloved and the hated ; and if the first- 
born be hers that was hated, then it 
shall be, when he maketh his sons to 
inherit that which he hath, that he may 
not make the son of the beloved first- 
born before the son of the hated.' Now 
this is a strange law to come in after a 
law that had denounced death on any 
one that should have two wives. For 



196 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



if the first law were executed, the sec- 
ond would be superfluous. The second 
supposes men to be living quietly and 
rearing families, and making wills at 
the close of a peaceful life, when the 
previous law supposes them to have 
died malefactors. It involves the ab- 
surdity of one law made on the suppo- 
sition that the other would be trampled 
on.' 

If, then, polygamy is not forbidden in 
this passage, what is? We answer, 
that it was designed to discountenance 
the practice which is implied in the 
plain and literal terms of the text — the 
taking simultaneously of two sisters to 
wife. This was a practice which, as a 
general fact, would be attended with 
unhappy consequences to the domestic 
relations of all the parties concerned. 
Reference is undoubtedly to be had all 
along to the prevalent sentiments and 
usages of the Oriental nations. It is 
well known that among them the cus- 
tom of having more than one wife in a 
single household is very apt to engender 
rivalries, jealousies, and feuds between 
those who share the divided marital 
favors and affections of their common 
lord. In such a state of things, there 
was something peculiarly repulsive in 
the spectacle of two natural sisters, 
who ought to be tenderly bound to each 
other by the ties of blood, and studious 
of each other's happiness, thrown as a 
matter of course into a species of hos- 
tile attitude one towards the other, and 
thus proving each to each a source of 
continual irritation and vexation. Thus 
we see it was in the family of Jacob ; 
and it is highly probable that as in one 
of the foregoing precepts there was a 
latent allusion to the case of Abraham, 
so here was a designed, though im- 
plicit, reference to that of Jacob. The 
Most High would so frame the precept 
as to counteract the plea of patriarchal 
example for its violation. 

But all inferences, drawn from the 
phrase *in her life time,' as if that 
legitimated, after the death of the one 



sister, a marriage which was forbidden 
before, are wholly gratuitous. Such 
an implication cannot be shown to have 
entered at all into the drift of the pre- 
cept. Its genuine purport was to inti- 
mate that the vexation created by such 
a step to the first wife would last as 
long as she lived — that there would be 
^ no discharge in that (domestic) war.* 
And with a very malicious or evil- 
minded man, this fact might of itself 
be in some cases a prompting motive to 
such a union. But upon all such con- 
siderate cruelty as this, the divine pre- 
cept would frown in advance. 

On the whole, therefore, we are una- 
ble to perceive that the precept we are 
now considering has any, even the most 
remote, relation to the subject of inces- 
tuous marriages treated of in the pre- 
ceding context. The whole law con- 
cerning incest closes with the 17th 
verse. The prohibition in the 18th re- 
spects altogether another subject, and 
is as distinct from incest as any of the 
other crimes mentioned and forbidden 
in the remaining parts of the chapter. 
It might indeed appear, from the use 
of the word * neither ' at the commence- 
ment of the verse, that it was intimately 
connected with the foregoing. But this 
rendering is not borne out by the origi- 
nal. It is the simple particle 1 re, and, 
which we find in the Hebrew text, and 
is precisely the same word which in the 
three subsequent verses is translated 
respectively, ^ also, ^ moreover,' and 
^ and ;' and the usual paragraph dis- 
tinction might very properly have been 
introduced here. 

But we proceed with the exposition. 

^ To vex her. Heb. ^^irj) litzror, 

to vex ; i. e. to produce vexation in the 
family, to the first wife mainly, no 
doubt, but not to her alone, as the ap- 
popriate word for 'her' is wemting in 
the original. Still it is properly enough 
inserted in our translation. The origi- 
nal is happily expressive of the mutual 
broils and bickerings which are so prone 
to arise under a system of polygamy, and 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



197 



of which we have an example in the 
case of Hannah and Penninah, in the 
family of Elkanah. 1 Sam. 1. 6, 7, 
* And her adversary (nri'llZ tzdrdthdhj 
her vexer) also provoked her sore, for 
to make her fret, because the Lord had 
shut up her womb. And as she did so 
year by year, when she went up to the 
house of the Lord, so she provoked her ; 
therefore she wept and did not eat.' If 
this was a state of things to be depre- 
cated between women who were not 
related before marriage, how much 

more hetv^^een sisters! IT To uncover 

her nakedness besides the other. Heb. 
n'^PS^ nri1^5? ruiriP legallotk ervathah 
dlehdy to uncover her nakedness upon 
her. The phraseology is somewhat 
ambiguous, as it does not at once appear 
to w^hich of the sisters the suffix ' her ' 
infers. Is it the one who is vexed 
whose nakedness is uncovered, or the 
other ? It is to be observed that 
in the original there is no word strictly 
answering to ^ the other.' That which 
our version renders ' besides the other,' 
is in the Heb. M'^i^!' upon or by her, 
and the feminine suffix H hd, her, un- 
doubtedly refers to the same person as 
the n hd, her, in nrn^5> ervathah, na- 
kedness. The true reading then is — 
' to uncover her (the first wife's) na- 
kedness upon her (the first wife) in her 
life-time.' This appears to be the ne- 
cessary grammatical construction, but 
how does this vex the first wife, to un- 
cover her own nakedness upon or by 
herself? The solution of the difficulty 
we believe is to be found in the fact 
clearly intimated in v. 7, that the na- 
kedness of the husband is the nakedness 
of the wife, and that what is here term- 
ed the ^ uncovering of her nakedness ' is 
really the uncovering of the nakedness 
of the husband, and exposing it to the 
second wife, which is of course done 
by, upon, beside the first, and therefore 

to her grievance and vexation. TT In 

her life-time. Heb. in"i^r(!2 behayehd, 
in her life. That is, as intimated above, 
during the period of her life, as long 
17* 



as she lives. The next verse affords 
a phraseology strikingly equivalent. 
' Thou shalt not approach unto a wo- 
man — as long as she is set apart,^ &c. 
This is expressed in the Hebrew by the 
single word m!:!Q beniddath, in her 
separation, i. e. during the continuance 
of her state of separation. We give in 
this connexion the note of Bishop Pa- 
trick on this phrase. ' From hence 
some infer that a man was permitted 
to marry the sister of his former wife, 
when she was dead. So the Talmud- 
ists ; but the Karaites thought it abso- 
lutely unlawful, as Mr. Selden observes, 
(De Uxore Hebr. Lib, l,cap. 4). For 
it is directly against the scope of all 
these laws, which prohibit men to marry 
at all with such persons as are here 
mentioned, either in their wives' life- 
time or after. And there being a pro- 
hibition V. 16, to marry a brother's wife, 
it is unreasonable to think Moses gave 
them leave to marry their wives' sister. 
These words, therefore, 'in her life- 
time,' are to be referred, not to the first 
words, ' neither shalt thou take,' but to 
the next, ' to vex her,' as long as she 
lives. In this the ancient Christians 
were so strict that if a man, after his 
wafe died, married her sister, he was, 
by the tenth canon of the Council of 
Eliberis, to be kept from the commu- 
nion for five years.' 

We have thus given what, on the 
whole, we are constrained to regard as 
the genuine sense of this important part 
of the Penteteuch, both in its general 
scope and in its minuter details. We 
may possibly have erred by adopting 
false principles of interpretation, or by 
a wrong application of those which are 
right. But as we have candidly stated 
the grounds and evidence of every posi- 
tion assumed, the reader will be able to 
judge for himself how far the premises 
sustain the conclusion, and how far a 
sound exegesis sustains the premises. 
To our minds the evidence decidedly 
preponderates in favor of the opinion 
that the laws contained in the present 



198 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490, 



19 q Also thou shall not approach 
unto a woman to uncover her na- 
kedness, as long as she is put apart 
for her uncleanness. 

20 Moreover, r thou shalt not lie 

qch. 20. 18. Ezek. 18.C, and22. 10. ^ch. 
20. 10. Exod. 20. 14. Deut. 5. 18, and 22. 22. 
Prov. 6. 29, 32. Mai. 3. 5. Matt. 5. 27. 
Rom. 2. 22. 1 Cor. 6. 9. Heb. 13. 4. 

chapter (v. 6-17), have respect not 
merely to lewdness in generalj but to 
incest — that they are in their nature 
moral and not ceremonial, and therefore 
universally and perpetually binding — 
that the implied prohibitions are equally 
authoritative with the express — and 
consequently the marriage with a de- 
ceased wife's sister is clearly contrary 
to the revealed word of God. At the 
same time, we entertain unfeigned re- 
spect for the logical and philological 
reasonings of those who, under the 
promptings of an equally sincere desire 
to ascertain the truth, have been brought 
to a different conclusion. Many of 
their arguments are entitled to very 
great weight, and we cannot fully as- 
sure ourselves that they have been fairly 
and successfully met in the foregoing 
series of remarks. But wherever the 
truth may lie, we still indulge a strong 
confidence that it will eventually be 
reached ; and the present awakened 
state of the Christian mind in this land 
gives a happy presage that this result 
will ere long be realized. 



Other forms of Sexual Commerce, and 
still grosser Crimes , forbidden. 

19. Also thou shalt not approach unto 
a woman, &c. Heb. tllDH^ "^^ el isha, 
to a woman, or wife. Consequently not 
to one's own wife. The penalty annexed 
to this precept is stated ch. 20. 18. The 
transgression of it is reckoned among 
the crying- sins of Israel, Ezek. 22. 10. 

20. Moreover, thou shalt not lie car- 
nally, &c. Heb. iJ-iti '^nn:D:r! "pt) jj^i 

lo titt'in shekohteka lezdra, thou shalt 
not give thy cohabitation (or concum- 



carnally with thy neighbour's wife, 
to defile thyself with her. 
21 And thou shalt not let any of 
thy seed 3 pass through the fire to 
t Molech, neither shalt thou « pro- 

s ch. 20. 2. 2 Kings 16. 3, and 21. 6, and 
23. 10. Jer. 19. 5. Ezek. 20. 31, and 23. 37, 
39. t 1 Kings 11.7, 33. Acts 7. 43. u ch. 19. 
12, and 20. 3, and 21. 6, and 22. 2, 32. Ezek. 
36. 20, &c. Mai. 1. 12. 

hency) to seed ; i. e. to the effusion of 
seed ; a form of expression sufficiently 
well represented by our version. Le- 
clerc suggests that it may be intended 
to distinguish a sinful cohabitation from 
that accidental but innocent lying to- 
gether which might happen from some 
extraordinary accident in a flight or 
journey. 

21. Thou shalt not let any of thy seed 
pass through the fire to Molech. The 
name of this idol, which was especially 
worshipped by the Ammonites, is de- 
rived from ^p^ mdlak, to reign, the 
root of ^)2 melek, king, and is sup- 
posed to have represented the sun, the 
great fountain of fire and of light. In 
the inhuman worship of this idol, little 
children were either actually burnt 
alive in the way of consecration to him, 
or were made to pass between two rows 
of burning fires, from which they barely 
escaped with life, and probably not 
always with that. The words ' the fire ' 
do not here occur in the original, but 
they are supplied in Deut. 18. 10, and 
2 Kings 11.3, which are elsewhere ex- 
plained as apparently equivalent to 
' burn in the fire,' 2 Chron. 28. 3. Le- 
clerc supposes very ingeniously that the 
term ^ pass through,' omitting ' the fire,' 
was invented by the priests of Molech 
or Moloch, that the horrid sacrifice 
might be expressed by the mildest pos- 
sible phrase. This form of idolatry is 
mentioned and forbidden in the present 
connexion, in the midst of laws relative 
to incest and lewdness, from its being 
esteemed a kind of spiritual adultery 

IT Neither shalt thou profane the 

name of thy God, Heb. ^)!int\te^iall'tl) 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XVIII. 



199 



^ fane the name of thy God : I am 
the Lord. 

22 X Thou shalt not lie with man- 
kind, as with womankind : it is 
abomination. 

23 y Neither shalt thou lie with 
any beast to defile thyself there- 
with : neither shall any woman 

xch. 20. 13. Rom. 1. 27. 1 Cor. 6. 9. 
1 Tim. 1. 10. y ch. 20. 15, 16. Exod. 22. 19. 

pollute ; the contrary of hallowing or 
sanctifying. The holy name of God is 
polluted or profaned not only by irrev- 
erent and blasphemous speech^ but by 
such conduct as tends to give that honor 
and allegiance, which is due to him 
alone, to another. 

22. Thou shalt not lie with mankind 
as with womankind. Heb. "n^t Ti^ eth 
zdkdr, with a male. The characteristic 
sin of Sodom, and thence deriving the 
name by which it is known in the crim- 
inal codes of modern times. Comp. 
Deut. 23. 17. It is enumerated by the 
apostle, Rom. 1. 27, among the preva- 
lent abominations of heathenism ,• and 
the best authorities assure us that under 
the name oi pederasty^ or boy-love, it 
was practised not only by several of the 
Roman emperors, but by some of the 
Greek philosophers. The penalty an- 
nexed to this law is stated as follows, 
ch. 20. 13 : ^ If a man also lie wath man- 
kind, as he lieth with a woman, both of 
them have committed an abomination : 
they shall surely be put to death ; their 
blood shall be upon them.' The pen- 
alties enacted by modern legislators 
against this and the crime of bestiality, 
evince it as the general sense of en- 
lightened and Christian nations, that 
those who thus shockingly degrade 
human nature are not ^vorthy to live 
among men. 

General Lissuasives. 

24. For in these all the nations are 

defiled which I cast out before you. 

Heb. ni!!5^ '^iJs^ 'niL^i^ asher ani meshal- 

la^h, which I am casting out. The 



stand before a beast to lie down 
thereto : it is z confusion. 

24 a Defile not ye yourselves in 
any of these things: bfor in all 
these the nations are defiled which 
I cast out before you : 

25 And c the land is defiled : 

z ch. 20. 12. a ver. 30. Matt. 15. IS, 

19, 20. Mark 7. 21, 22, 23. 1 Cor. 3. 17. 

b ch. 20. 23. Deut. 18. 12. c Numb. 35. 

34. Jer. 2, 7, and 16. 18. Ezek. 36. 17. 

Canaanites being divided into several 
clans or tribes, are spoken of in the 
plural, as ' nations ;' and they, it appears, 
were so completely overrun with these 
foul abominations, that a righteous God 
could bear with them no longer ; and 
as they were now lymg under his curse, 
so they were shortly, by his sword, 
wielded by the hands of the chosen 
people, to be completely destroyed. 
By the coming doom of the Canaanites, 
therefore, he w^ould have them to take 
warning, and not to imagine that any 
peculiar favoritism would save them 
from a similar destruction, provided 
they were guilty of similar crimes. On 
the other hand, they might reasonably 
anticipate a more aggravated and fear- 
ful judgment, according to the declared 
principle of the divine administration, 
' Because you only have I known of all 
the nations of the earth, therefore will 
I punish your iniquities.' ■ 

25. Therefore I do visit the iniquity 
thereof upon it, &c. Heb. ^p55^T 
vdephkod, properly I have visited ; i. e. 
have punished ; and in the next clause 
hath vomited, instead of vomiteth ; the 
praeterite being used for greater em- 
phasis. The certainty of the result was 
such, that it is spoken of as if already 

accomplished. IF The land itself 

vomiteth out her inhabitants. A bold 
rhetorical figure, intimating that the 
sins of the inhabitants were so unutter- 
ably vile and loathsome, that the very 
land itselfnauseated and abhorred them, 
and threw them out, as the stomach 
does the food that offends it. 

30. Therefore shall yc keep mine 



200 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



therefore I do ^Wisit the iniquity | 
thereof upon it, and the land itself | 
e vomiteth out her inhabitants. 

26 f Ye shall therefore keep my 
statutes and my judgments, and 
shall not commit any of these 
abominations ; neither any of your 
own nation, nor any stranger that 
sojounieth among you : 

27 (For all these abominations 
have the men of the land done, 
which were before you, and the 
land is defiled :) 

28 That g the land spue not you 
out also, when ye defile it, as it 
spued out the nations that were 
before you. 

29 For whosoever sliall commit 
any of these abominations, even 

<i Ps. 89. 32. Isai. 26. 21. Jer. 5. 9, 29, and 
9. 9, and 14. 10, and 23. 2. Hos. 2. 13, and 
8. 13, and 9. 9. e ycr. 28. f ver. 5, 30. ch. 
20. 22, 23. g ch. 20. 22. Jer. 9. 19. Ezek. 
36. 13, 17. 

ordinance^ &c. Heb. Tii^ tDril^^U^ 
^ri^^lL*/^ shemartcm eth mishmartl, ye 
shall keep my keepings; i.e. my charge j 
that which ^ I have delivered you to 
keep ; implying that the only way to 
be preserved from all false worship, is 
seriousl)'- to consider and devoutly to 
observe the ordinances of the true re- 
ligion. 



CHAPTER XIX, 
The present chapter is devoted, for 
the most part, to the repetition of cer- 
tain laws which had been before given, 
but which from their intrinsic import- 
ance, the divine wisdom saw fit to insist 
upon with special emphasis. It will 
be seen that they have in the main more 
reference to moral than to positive du- 
ties, and brief as it is, it may be confi- 
dently afiirmed that no merely human 
code was ever devised so well calculated 
m its observance to promote the well- 
being of the race. Except in one 
single case we find no special penalty 
annexed to the transgression of these 
precepts, but they are delivered as self- 



the souls that commit them shall 
be cut ofif from among their people. 
30 Therefore shall ye keep mine 
ordinance, ^ that ye commit not any 
one of these abominable customs, 
which were committed before you, 
and that ye i defile not yourselves 
therein : ^lam the Lord your God. 

CHAPTER XIX. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 

2 Speak unto all the congregation 
of the children of Israel, and say 
unto them, a Ye shall be holy: for 
I the Lord your God am holy. 

3 ^ b Ye shall fear every man his 
mother and his father, and c keep 
my sabbaths : I am the Lord your 
God. 

hver. 3, 26. ch. 20. 23. Deut. IS. 9. 
i ver. 24. k ver. 2, 4. a ch, 11. 44, and 20. 
7, 26. 1 Pet 1. 16. l^ Exod. 20. 12. c Exod. 
20. 8, and 31. 13. 

enforced on the simple supreme author- 
ity of Him who enacts them ; ^ I am 
the Lord your God ' — a declaration 
which in this connexion is, as it were, a 
royal signature to a solemn edict. 

2. Say unto themj Ye shall be holy : 
for I the Lord your God am holy. The 
same sanction had been given before, 
ch. 11. 44, in connexion with the pre- 
cepts respecting the distinction of 
meats, by which they were to be severed 
and set apart from all other nations ; 
and so here when they are again com- 
manded to be distinguished from all 
other people by a peculiar system of 
moral laws and usages, the same in- 
junction is repeated. Indeed one grand 
leading sense involved in the term ' holy' 
is separated J sequestered^ set apart from 
that which is common and secular. 

Enjoining Revere?ice of Parents. 

3. Ye shall fear every man his mother 
and his father. The 'fear' here re- 
quired, is virtually the same with the 
honor commanded by the fifth com- 
mandment. It includes inward re ver- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIX. 



201 



4 IT *^ Turn ye not unto idols, e nor 
make to yourselves molten gods : 
I am the Lord your God. 

tl Exod. 20. 4. ch. 26. 1. 1 Cor. 10. 14. 
1 John 5. 21. e Exod. 34. 17. Deut. 27. 15. 

ence and esteem, outward expression of 
respect, obedience to the lawful com- 
mands of parents, care and endeavor to 
please and render tliem comfortable, 
and to avoid any thing that may offend 
and grieve them, or incur their displea- 
sure. It will be noticed also that in 
this connexion the 'mother' is men- 
tioned before the * father,' which is con- 
trary to prevailing usage. The two 
precepts, ' Honor thy father and thy 
mother,' and ' Fear thy mother and thy 
father,' when taken together plainly 
evince that both father and mother are 
to be regarded as entitled to equal to- 
kens of honor, respect, and reverence. 
If the ' father ' had been uniformly 
placed first, it might have impercepti- 
bly begotten the impression that the 
mother's claims to veneration were but 

of a secondary nature. IT Keep my 

sabbaths, i. e. not only the seventh day, 
but all other appointed days, which 
were also called sabbaths. Chal. ^ Keep 
my sabbath-days.' This precept is 
joined with that requiring filial rever- 
ence, inasmuch as it is supposed that 
if God provides by law for the preserv- 
ing of the honor of parents, parents will 
use their authority for keeping up in 
the minds and conduct of their child- 
ren a due regard for the divine institu- 
tions, particularly the one in question. 
The contempt of parents, and the profa- 
nation of the sabbath usually go toge- 
ther, and begin the ruin of the young. 
The prospects of those children are the 
brightest who make conscience of hon- 
oring their parents and keeping holy 
the sabbath day. 

Idolatry forbidden. 
4. Turn ye not unto idols. Heb. 
t3*^?'^ii<fl '^^ el hdelilim, to non-enti- 
ties, Gr. ovK eTiaKo\ovQr]aeT& siScaXoiSj 



5 H And <'if ye oflfer a sacrifice of 
peace-oflferings unto the Loud, ye 
shall oflfer it at your own will. 

6 It shall be eaten the same day 

f ch. 7. 16. 



follow not idols. The import of the 
original is things of nought, nothings, 
vanities, in allusion to which the apos- 
tle says, 1 Cor. 8. 4, ' We know that an 
idol is nothing in the world.' The 
word occurs also in Job 13. 4, ' Ye are 
forgers of lies, ye are aW physicians of 
no value (i^'^^ ^{J^S^ rophee elil, phy- 
sicians of nought) ,^ which gives still 
farther light upon the meaning of the 
term. To such idols they were not to 
' turn ' in a way of heed, affection, con- 
sultation, or worship. They were not 
to regard them but with the utmost ab- 
horrence, and as the chief of all abomi- 
nations. They could not turn to them, 
without turning away from God, and 

this would be downright apostacy. 

IF Nor make to yourselves molten gods. 
Heb. HwD^S "^nii^ elohe massekah, gods 
of molting, such, for instance, as was 
the molten calf fabricated by Aaron at 
the instigation of the people, Ex. 32. 4. 
The spirit of the precept prohibits, of 
course, every species of image, whether 
molten or graven, designed as a repre- 
sentative of any object of worship. 
Habak. 2. 18, ' What profiteth the gra- 
ven image that the maker thereof hath 
graven it j the molten image, and (even) 
a teacher of lies, that the maker of his 
work trusteth therein, to make dumb 
idols?' 

Concerning Peace-offerings. 
5-8. If ye offer a sacrifice of peace- 
offerings, &c. As they were to avoid 
all idolatry, so they were to be careful 
to perform the service due to God in 
the prescribed manner. Peace-offerings 
are here mentioned as perhaps the most 
common, but the spirit of the precept 
doubtless applies to all others. The 
various rites and ceremonies connected 
with this offering have been already 



202 



LEVITICUS, 



[B. C. 1490. 



ye offer it, and on the morrow: and 
if aught remain until the third day, 
it shall be burnt in the fire. 

7 And if it be eaten at all on the 
third day, it is abominable ; it shall 
not be accepted. 

8 Therefore every one that eateth 
it shall bear his iniquity, because 
he hath profaned the hallowed 
thing of the Lord ; and that soul 

detailed, ch. 3. 7, 16. IT Ye shall offer 

it at your own will. Or rather, accord- 
ing to the Heb. tliDi^^^ lirtzonekem, 
* to your favorable acceptation,' i. e. in 
such a manner as may secure the divine 
favor and acceptance, which it would 
not do if it were offered otherwise than 
in exact accordance with the prescribed 
mode. See Note on Lev. 1. 3. 

Gleanings to be left for the Poor. 
9. When ye reap the harvest of your 
land J thou shalt not wholly reap^ &c. 
Heb. '^nin ni<& np::ri 5^b lo tekalleh 
peath sddeka, thou shalt not finish, con- 
summate, make a full end of, the corner 
of thy field; thou shalt not make a 
clean riddance of it. On this precept 
the Jewish canons remark, ' He that 
reapeth his field must not reap all the 
field wholly ; but must leave a little 
standing corn for the poor in the end of 
the field, whether he cut it or pluck it 
up : and that which is left is called the 
corner (H^^ peah). And as he must 
leave of the field, so of the trees, when 
he gathereth their fruit, he must leave a 
little for the poor.' The Jewish writers 
say that a sixtieth part was left. How- 
ever this may be, the precept is full of 
interest, as exhibiting a very amiable 
feature of the Levitical law, which in 
many of its provisions breathed a spirit 
of humane and benevolent consideration, 
for which we look in vain to any other 
code, either of ancient or modern times. 
* The right of the poor in Israel to glean 
after the reapers, was thus secured by a 
positive law\ It is the opinion of some 
writers, that although the poor were 



shall be cut oflf from among his 
people. 

9 If And g when ye reap the har* 
vest of your land, thou shalt not 
wholly reap the corners of thy field, 
neither shalt thou gather the glean- 
ings of thy harvest. 

10 And thou shalt not glean thy 

S ch. 23. 22. Deut. 24. 19, 20, 21. Ruth 
2. 15. 16. 



allowed the liberty of gleaning, the 
Israelitish proprietors were not obliged 
to admit them immediately into the 
field, as soon as the reapers had cut 
down the corn, and bound it up ia 
sheaves, but when it was carried off; 
they might choose also among the 
poor, whom they thought most deserv- 
ing or most necessitous. These opin- 
ions receive some countenance from the 
request which Ruth presented to the 
servant of Boaz, to permit her to glean 
^ among the sheaves ;' and from the 
charge of Boaz to his young men, ' let 
her glean even among the sheaves j' a 
mode of speaking which seems to insin- 
uate, that though they could not legally 
hinder Ruth from gleaning in the field, 
they had a right, if they chose to exer- 
cise it, to prohibit her from gleaning 
among the sheaves, or immediately 
after the reapers.' — Paxton. IT Nei- 
ther shalt thou gather the gleanings of 
the harvest. That is, if a few ears of 
corn, as they were cutting or binding it 
up, fell out of the sheaves or from under 
the sickle, they were not to gather them 
up from the ground, but to leave them 
for the poor. And so also in respect to 
the scattered grape- clusters of the vin- 
tage. The rule thus given was intended 
for the benefit not only of the poor, but 
also of the stranger ; for as strangers 
and foreigners could not hold their pos- 
sessions on the same advantageous 
terms as native Israehtes, they were 
very liable to be oppressed by poverty. 
It is easy to perceive that the natural 
tendency of this law was to inculcate a 
kindly, liberal, generous spirit, the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIX. 



203 



vineyard, neither shalt thou gather 
every grape of thy vineyard ; thou 
shalt leave them for the poor and 
stranger : I ain the Lord your God. 

11 f ii Ye shall not steal, neither 
deal falsely, i neither lie one to 
another. 

12 1[ And ye shall not ^ swear by 

b Exod. 20. 15, and 22. 1, 7, 10. Deut. 5. 
19. i ch. 6. 2. Eph. 4. 25. Col. 3. 9. 
k Exod. 20. 7. ch. 6. 3. Deut. 5. 11. Matt. 
6. 33. Jam. 5. 12. 

direct reverse of a disposition covetous 
and griping, and which would prompt a 
man vigorously to insist on his right in 
matters small and trivial. It is a les- 
son which the selfish nature of man 
needs to have powerfully enforced upon 
him, that that is not necessarily lost or 
wasted, which goes to relieve the wants 
or diminish the woes of our common 
humanity. 

Against Stealing^ Lying, False Swear- 
ing, and Defrauding. 
11-13. Ye shall not steal, &c. A num- 
ber of moral precepts, important to the 
upholding of truth and justice in society, 
are here inserted. The drift of them is 
to inculcate a rigid adherence to truth 
in our communications, and to honesty 
in our dealings with our fellow men. 
Stealing had been before forbidden in 
the eighth commandment, and lying in 
the ninth ; but they are here repeated 
and put together, because they generally 
go together. He that will steal will He 
to hide it ; and he that will lie shows 
that the first moral barrier is broken 
down which stands in the way of the 

commission of any and all crimes. 

^ Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor 
nor rob him. Heb. p"i:5>n taa^^ok and 
5t:5ln tigzol. The first of these terms 
signifies in the original to oppress by 
fraud, the second, to oppress by vio- 
lence. Against both these offences 
John the Baptist warned the soldiers 
who came to him, Luke 3. 14, ' And he 
said unto them, Bo violence to no man, 
neither accuse any falsely; and be con- 



my name falsely, i neither shalt 
thou profane the name of thy God : 
I a7n the Lord. 

13 1|m Thou shalt not defraud thy 
neighbour, neither rob him : n the 
wages of him that is hired shall 
not abide with thee all night until 
the morning. 

14 II Thou shalt not curse the 

1 ch. 18. 21. mMark 10. 19. 1 Thess. 4. 
6. n Deut. 24. 14, 15. Mai. 3. 5. 

tent with your wages.' These sins of 
fraudulent oppression and robbery are 
often charged by the prophets upon the 
nation of Israel. See Is. 3. 14. Jer. 

22. 2. M The wages of him that is 

hired shall not abide, &c. Inasmuch as 
the wages of the hireling, a day-laborer, 
were the support of himself and family, 
and they would necessarily be forced to 
expend it as fast as it could be earned. 
There are few sins marked in the Scrip- 
tures more with the emphatic reproba- 
tion of heaven than the withholding of 
wages from those to whom they are 
due. James 5. 1, 4^ ' Go to now, ye rich 
men, weep and howl for your miseries 
that shall come upon you. ^ ^ Behold, 
the hire of the laborers who have reaped 
down your fields, which is of you kept 
back by fraud, crieth • and the cries of 
them which have reaped are entered 
into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.' 
If the Scriptures had approved the sys- 
tem of ' credit ' in doing business, it 
would scarcely have been so strenuous 
in the requisition for prompt payment. 

Against taking advantage of the Infirm- 
ity of the Deaf or Blind. 
14. Thou shalt not curse. Heb. 
P^ptl Ji^J lo tekallel, thou shalt not vili- 
fy, defame, contemptuously disparage. 
Gr. ovK KUKcos ep€i?, thou shalt not speak 
evil of. Not being able to hear, he 
could not, of course, vindicate his own 
character. In cursing one who could 
hear there was no doubt a wicked ma- 
lignity 5 but in cursing the deaf there 
was, moreover, an inexpressible mean- 



204 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



deaf, o nor put a stumbling-block 
before the blind, but shalt pfear 
thy God : I am the Lord. 

15 1i[ q Ye shall do no unrighteous- 
ness in judgment ; thou shalt not 
respect the person of the poor, nor 
honour the person of the mighty : 

o Deut. 27. IS. Rom. 14. 13. P ver. 32. 
ch. 25. 17. Gen. 42. 18. Eccles. 5. 7. 1 Pet. 
2. 17. q Exod. 23. 2, 3. Deut. 1. 17, and 16. 
19, and 27. 19. Ps. 82. 2. Prov. 24. 23. 
James 2. 9. 

ness. The case of the absent, who are 
GUI of hearing of the curse, is obviously 
the same as that of the deaf, and we see 
no reason why the prohibition does not 

include both. ^ Nor put a stum- 

hling block before the blind. Gr. ov 
Trpoadrjaeig CKavSaXov, thou shalt not put 
a scandal (a cause of stumbling or 
offence). This precept the gospel 
makes universal. Rom. 14. 13, ' Let 
no man put a stumbling-block (Gr. 
cKav{]a\ov, a scandaj) , in his brother's 
way.' Again, Matt. 18. 7, ' Woe unto 
the world because of offences (Gr. 
cKav^aXttj scandals, or stumbling-blocks).' 
The spirit of these precepts is to forbid 
not only the ridiculing the bodily infir- 
inities, but the taking advantage, in 
any case, of the ignorance, simplicity, 
or inexperience of others, particularly 
the giving bad counsel to those that are 
simple and easily imposed upon, by 
which they may be led to do something 
to their own injury. On the contrary, 
we are always to do to our neighbor as 
we would, upon a change of circum- 
stances, that he should do to us.-^ 
ir Shalt fear thy God. Though thou 
mayest not fear the deaf and the blind, 
who cannot call thee to an account, yet 
remember that God both sees and hears, 
and he will avenge thy wickedness. 

Against respect of Persons in Judgment. 
15. Thou shalt not respect the person 
of the poor. Heb. ID'^DS ^l!2t) i^i lo 
tisse pdnim, thou shalt not lift up or 
accept the face. That is, shalt not show 
favor from private regards, and thus 



but in righteousness shalt thou 
judge thy neighbour. 

16 H r Thou shalt not go up and 
down as a tale-bearer among thy 
people; neither shalt thou s stand 
against the blood of thy neighbour ; 
I am the Lord. 



r Exod. 23. 1. Ps. 15. 3, and 60. 20. Prov. 
11. 13, and 20. 19. Ezek. 22. 9. » Exod. 23. 
1, 7. 1 Kings 21. 13. Matt. 26. 60, 61, and 
27.4. 



pervert the cause of justice. See the 
phrase explained Gen. 19. 21. Though 
the poverty of the poor might plead 
strongly in their favor, yet this was not 
to influence the decisions of the judge. 

Against Tale-hearing, 
16. Thou shalt not go up and down 
as a tale-bearer among thy people. Heb. 
i'^^^ "jin Jj^i lo telek rdkil. The orig- 
inal i^i^l rakil properly signifies a 
trader, a pedlar, and is here applied to 
one who travels up and down dealing in 
slanders and detractions, as a merchant 
does in wares, possessing himself of the 
secrets of individuals and of families, 
and then blazing them abroad, usually 
with a false coloring as to motives, and 
a distortion of facts. In the Septuagint 
the Heb. is rendered, Prov. 11. 13, and 
20. 19, by a word signifying Mouble- 
tongued ;' and in the New Testament 
the term seems to be SiapoXo? diabolos, 
false accuser, slanderer, calumniator. 
The Chal. renders the present passage, 
* Thou shalt not divulge accusations, or 
detractions, among the people.' In this 
sense the word is employed Dan. 6. 24, 
in reference to ' the men which had 
accused (SiaPoXavras slandered) Daniel,' 
and analogous to this the common name 
applied to the Devil in Greek is Siap- 
o\os diabolos, from his character of 
calumniator and ' accuser of the breth- 
ren,' denominated in the Syriac, Matt. 
4. 1, 6, 8, &c., a ' divulger of accusa- 
tions.* ^ Neither shalt thou stand 

against the blood, &c. That is, thou 
shalt neither be a false witness to the 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIX. 



205 



17 H t Thou shalt not hate thy 
brother ia thine heart : u thou shalt 

t 1 John -2. 9, 11, and 3. 15. u Matt. 18. 15. 
Luke 17. 3. Gal. 6. 1. Ephes. 6. 11. 1 Tim. 

endangering of a man's hfe, nor shalt 
thou stand by and see thy neighbor in- 
jured, crushed, ruined, and perhaps his 
hfe taken, without an effort to save hini. 
This precept is joined with the preced- 
ing, because tale-bearing, by sowing 
discord and breeding broils in society 
often led to the shedding of blood. 
Thus Ezek. 22. 9, ^ In thee are men that 
carry tales to shed blood.^ The case of 
Doeg, ] Sam. 22. 9, 18, is one singularly 
in point in the present instance, ' Then 
answered Doeg the Edomite, which was 
set over the servants of Saul, and said, 
I saw the son of Jesse coming to Nob, 
to Abimelech the son of Ahitub, &c. 
And the king said to Doeg, Turn thou 
and fall upon the priests. And Doeg 
the Edomite turned, and fell upon the 
priests, and slew in that day fourscore 
and five persons that did w^ear a linen 
ephod.' 

Against Hatred and Uncharitableness. 
17. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in 
thine heart. That is, thou shalt not 
conceal thy hatred against him for any 
wrong that he has done thee j but shall 
mildly yet faithfully rebuke him, en- 
deavoring to convince him of the wrong, 
and to bring him both to acknowledge 
his sin before God, and to make the 
adequate reparation. The Jews explain 
the precept thus : ' When any man sin- 
neth against another, he must not in- 
wardly hate him and keep silence ; as 
it is said of the wicked. And Absalom 
spake unto his brother Amnon neither 
good nor bad, for Absalom hated Am- 
non, 2 Sam. 13. 22 ; but he is command- 
ed to make it known unto him, and to 
say, Why hast thou done thus unto 
me?' This is confirmed by the Gospel 
rule, Luke 17. 3, '• If thy brother sin 
against thee, rebuke him ; and if he re- 
pent, forgive him.' It is possible, how- 
18 



in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, 
and not suffer sin upon him. 

5. 20. 2 Tim. 4. 2. Tit. 1. 13, and 2. 15. 
See Rom. 1. 32. 1 Cor. 5. 2. 1 Tim. 5. 22. 
2 John 11. 

ever, that the word * hate,' may here 
be intended to be used rather in the 
sense of virtual or constructive hatred, 
as when it is said that the parent who 
withholds the rod hates the child ; by 
which it is evidently implied, that one 
who fails to evince the proper tokens 
of love, is considered as indulging the 
sentiments of hate. God in his word so 
regards and speaks of it. Thus, in the 
present instance, the man who saw his 
brother, i. e. his neighbor, yielding to 
or living in sin, and forbore faithfully 
to rebuke him on account of it, was to 
be considered as acting the part of an 
enemy instead of a friend ; and the con- 
duct of an enemy is naturally supposed 
to be prompted by hatred instead of 
love. IT Thou shalt in any wise re- 
buke thy neighbor. Heh . Ti^tj^tTi hSin 
^hokea'h tokia'h, rebuking thou shalt 
rebuke ; i. e. thou shalt by ail means 
rebuke, or, thou shalt freely, plainly, 
soundly rebuke. The true force of the 
original is to convince, or rather to con- 
vict, of wrong by reasoning and argu- 
ment. Gr. eXzy^ZLS top Tz^.rjcnov aov, 
thou shalt convincingly or demonstra- 
tively reprove thy neighbor. IT And 

not suffer sin upon him. Heb. Jj^i 
t^&^n I'lyS'' Hi/^t) lo tissd dlauv Kit, which 
may perhaps be correctly rendered, 
' Thou shalt not bear sin (or punish- 
ment) for him ;' i. e. thou shalt not, on 
his account, for his sake, by reason of 
neglecting to do your duty to him, con- 
tract guilt to your own soul. This is 
the usual and appropriate meaning of 
the phrase, as appears from Lev. 22. 9, 
^ They shall therefore keep mine ordi- 
nance, lest they bear sin for it.^ Num. 
18. 32, ' And )-e shall bear no sin by 
reason of it ;' where the original is the 
same as in the present case. And in 
this sense both the Greek and the Chal- 
daic understand it. The import is, that 



206 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



IS IT ^ Thou shalt not avenge, nor 
bear any grudge against the child- 
ren of thy people, y but thou shalt 
love thy neighbour as thyself: I 
ain the Lord. 

X 2 Sam. 13. 22. Prov. 20. 22. Rom. 12. 
17, 19. Gal. 5. 20. Eph. 4,31. 1 Pet. 2. 1. 
Jam. 5. 9. y Matt. 5. 43, and 22. 39. Rom. 
13. 9. Gal. 5. 14. Jam. 2. 8. 

a man who failed to reprove sin in ano- 
ther rendered himself obnoxious to the 
same punishment as the original offend- 
er. The phrase, however, may bear 
the sense given it in our version, which 
is equivalent to saying, ' Thou shalt not 
suffer him to go on in sin by neglecting 
to inform of it ; shalt not leave him un- 
der the guilt of sin unreproved.' The 
saying ot one of the Jewish rabbins was 
long current as a proverb among the 
nation, ' That Jerusalem had not been 
destroyed, but because one neighbor did 
not reprove another.' 

Against Revenge. 
18. Thou shalt not avenge, &c. That 
is, thou shalt not take into thine own 
hands the business of redressing thy 
WTongs, nor shalt thou refuse to do a 
kindness from the remembrance of in- 
juries past. Gr. ovK CKSiKaraL aov i] %£'f), 

let not thine hand avenge. IT Nor 

bear any grudge, fleb. "ntDD i^'^ lo tit- 
tor^ thou shalt not watch , mark, or 
insidiously observe, the sins of thy peo- 
ple ; i. e. thou shalt not harbor resent- 
ment, and covertly watch an opportunity 
to ' feed fat an ancient grudge.' Gr. 
ov nrji'uig, thou shalt not bear inveterate 
anger. Chal. ' Thou shalt not keep 
(harbor) enmity.' So God is said, 
Nah. 1. 2, * to take vengeance on his 
adversaries, and to keep (watch) for 
his enemies.' But not so towards his 
people, Jer. 3. 12, ' For I am merciful, 
saith the Lord, and I will not keep 
(anger) for ever.' Ps. 103. 9, * He will 
not always chide ; nor keep (his anger) 
for ever ;' in all which cases the origi- 
nal word is the same. IT Thou shalt 

love thy neighbor as thyself : I am the 



19 If Ye shall keep my statutes. 
Thou shalt not let thy cattle gen- 
der with a diverse kind : z thou 
shalt not sow thy field with min- 
gled seed: a neither shall a gar- 
ment mingled of linen and woollen 
come upon thee. 

z Deut. 22. 9, 10. a Deut. 22. 11. 

Lord thy God. We have here in the 
midst of the Jewish code the grand 
moral law of the gospel, and that which 
our Savior himself gives as comprising 
the sum of the second table of the Deca- 
logue, or all the duties which we owe 
to our fellow-men. And this law is 
enforced by the solemn sanction con- 
tained in the words, ' I am the Lord 
your God ;' q. d. I am he who searches 
and perfectly knows your hearts, and 
the dispositions which you cherish, and 
who will reward and punish you accord- 
ingly. Nothing shows more conclu- 
sively how false and groundless are the 
charges sometimes brought against the 
Mosaic code as not only stern, cruel, 
and barbarous, but as insisting solely 
on certain outward rites and duties, 
without any respect to inward disposi- 
tions and motives. 

Against Mixtures in Cattle, Seed, and 

Garments. 

19. Ye shall keep my statutes. These 

words are here inserted lest the ensuing 

ordinance should be deemed of little 

moment and so be neglected. IT Thou 

shalt not let thy cattle gender with a 
diverse kind. This might perhaps 
have been forbidden in order to impress 
the Israelites with a greater abhorrence 
of the crime of bestiality, or at least to 
afford them among the brute creation 
no example of those unnatural com- 
mixtures which were prohibited in the 
foregoing chapter, v. 22, 23. Yet it 
would seem that it was not forbidden 
them to use animals produced from such 
mixtures, as we find mules very fre- 
quently mentioned in the sacred history, 
which it is well known are gendered in 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIX. 



207 



20 1[ And whosoever lieth car- 
nally with a woman that is a bond- 
maid betrothed to an husband, and 
not at all redeemed, nor freedom 
given her; she shall be scourged: 
they shall not be put to death, be- 
cause she was not free. 

this manner. See Note on Gen. 36. 24. 

As to seeds, it would in many cases, be 
very improper to sow different kinds in 
the same spot of ground, as many spe- 
cies of vegetables are disposed to mix 
and thus produce a very degenerate 
crop. Thus if oats and wheat w^ere 
sown together, the latter would be in- 
jured, the former ruined. The turnip 
and carrot w^ould not succeed conjointly, 
when either of them separately would 
prosper and yield a good crop ; and if 
this be all that is intended, the precept 
here given is agreeable to the soundest 
agricultural maxims. As to garments, 
the prohibition might have been merely 
intended to keep them aloof from the 
superstitious customs of the heathen, or 
to intimate how careful they should be 
not to mingle themselves with the 
Gentiles, nor to w^eave any profane 
usages into God's ordinances. 

Relative to the Bofid-maid betrothed. 

20. Whosoever lieth carnally with a 
woman that is a bond-maid. The exact 
rendering of the Hebrew is, ' And a man 
when he lieth w^ith a woman (with) the 
lying of seed,^ to which our version 
comes sufficiently near. In order fully 
to understand the drift of the precept, it 
must be borne in mind, that Gentile 
servants were often found amonsr the 
Hebrews, and these, if proselyted, were 
baptized, and that either wdth a reser- 
vation of their servitude, or with a full 
and free discharge. But it appears that 
there were some in a kind of interme- 
diate or half-way condition, partly free 
and partly servile, viz., when part only 
of their redemption-money had been 
paid, a balance yet remaining. Now as 
no Israelite might marry such a woman 



21 And b he shall bring his tres- 
pass-offering unto the Lord, unto 
the door of the tabernacle of the 
congregation, eveyi a ram for a tres- 
pass-offering. 

22 And the priest shall make an 

b ch. 5. 15, and 6. 6. 

while perfectly a slave ; so, although 
he might espouse her when partly free, 
and the espousals be valid, yet they 
could not be of full force till her enfran- 
chisement was complete. Of a bond- 
woman in these circumstances the He- 
brew doctors understand Moses in this 
passage to speak, as Maimonides says 
expressly, ' The bond-woman betrothed 
spoken of in the law, is one that is half a 
bond-woman and half a free-woman, and 
betrothed to an Hebrew servant.' Gr. 
avrrj oiKsrig /; SianScpvXayfjLCvri avdpcomOj 
she shall be reserved a household-ser- 
vant for a man. IT Not at all re- 

deemed, nor freedom given her. Ra- 
ther, not fully, not entirely redeemed, 
but only in part ; and therefore her 
freedom not absolutely granted to her. 

IT She shall be scourged. Heb. 

{"i'^nri Ti^iP^ bikkoreth tihyeh, there 
shall be a scourging. The original 
n^pr; bikkoreth from the root "Ipn ba- 
kar, to search, to inquire into, to ex- 
amine diligently, to take note of any 
person or thing, and thence in the de- 
rivative inquisition, animadversion, 
punishment, the frequent effect of a 
rigid examination, of a close and pry- 
ing scrutiny. Gr. ec-at. s-iaKo-Tj^ there 
shall be visitation. If she had been 
perfectly free both parties would have 
been put to death by virtue of the law, 
Deut. 22. 23, 25. But not being fully 
free, and consequently not fully the 
wife of her betrothed, it was not counted 
adultery ; and therefore punished only 
with scourging. From the literal ren- 
dering, ' there shall be scourging,' it 
would doubtless seem that both parties 
were to share in it alike : but the He- 
brew canons and the current of rabbin- 
ical authority favor rather the rendering 



208 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



atonement for him with the ram 
of the trespass-offering before the 
Lord for his sin which he hath 
done ; and the sin which he hath 
done shall be forgiven him. 
23 1[ And when ye shall come 
into the land, and shall have plant- 
ed all manner of trees for food ; 

of the English text—' She shall be 
scourged.' Maimonides says, ' The 
lying with this bond-woman differeth 
from all other unlawful connexions ; for 
lo, she is to be beaten, and he is bound 
to bring a trespass-offering.' So in the 
Talmud (Cheret. c. 2.) it is said, * In 
all unlawful connexions, whether it be 
man or woman, they are alike in stripes 
and in sacrifice : but in the case of the 
bond-woman, the man is not like to the 
woman in stripes, nor the woman to the 
man in sacrifice.' 

Relative to the Fruit of Trees. 
23. And when ye shall have come into 
the land. That is, into the promised 
land, to which alone it would seem this 
precept had reference. That it was 
based upon any thing beyond natural 
reasons, we see no grounds for believ- 
ing ; though Spencer and others have 
suggested that as the trees which they 
would find growing on their entrance 
into the land were planted by idolaters, 
and probably with superstitious cere- 
monies, their fruit being considered by 
the Israelites as for a time unclean, 
would tend to impress their minds with 
an idea of the impurity and abominable 
nature of idolatry. But it is evident 
from the text, that the precept has 
reference to such trees as they should 
themselves plants and that it was to be 
of like permanent authority with the 
other enactments of the Levitical code. 
Nor do we doubt that an adequate 
knowledge of vegetable physiology 
would disclose the utmost propriety in 
the direction. Indeed Michaelis says. 
Comment, on Laws of Moses, vol. 3. 
p. 367-8, * The economical object of 



then ye shall count the fruit thereof 
as uncircumcised : three years shall 
it be as uncircumcised unto you : 
it shall not be eaten of. 
24 But in the fourth year all the 
fruit thereof shall be holy c to praise 
the Lord withal, 

c Deut. 12. 17, 18. Prov. 3. 9. 



this law is very striking. Every gar- 
dener will teach us not to let fruit-trees 
bear in their earliest years, but to pluck 
off the blossoms ; and for this reason, 
that they will thus thrive the better, 
and bear more abundantly afterwards. 
Now, if we may not taste the fruit the 
first three years, we shall be the more 
disposed to pinch off the blossoms ; and 
the son will learn to do this from his 
father. The very expression, to regard 
them as uncircumcised, suggests the 
propriety of pinching them off ; I do not 
say cutting them off", because it is gen- 
erally the hand, and not a knife, that is 
employed in this operation.' Although, 
however, the use of the fruit was only 
interdicted for three years, the produce 
did not become available to the propri- 
etor till the fifth year, the first-fruits, 
that is those of that year, being in this, 
as in other instances, one of the dues 
from which the priests derived their 
subsistence. Perhaps a moral intima- 
tion to the efiect that men were to re- 
strain their appetites, and not to indulge 
in premature gratifications, was de- 
signed at the same time to be conveyed 
in this precept. Thus this wondrous 
code taught its subjects to find ' ser- 
mons in trees,' as well as ' good in 
every thing.' 

24. All the fruit thereof shall be holy 
to praise the Lord. Heb. fi'^iljn ll^Hp 
nirr^^ kodesh hillulim laihovah, holi' 
ness of praises to the Lord. That is, 
shall be consecrated to the Lord, and 
eaten with demonstrations of joy and 
praise, as Judg. 9. 27, * they made 
praise j' that is, they expressed their 
joyful emotions by songs of praises, 
and probably by dancing, as the Gr. ren- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIX. 



209 



25 And in the fifth year shall ye 
eat of the fruit thereof, that it may 
yield unto you the increase there- 
of; I am the Lord your God. 

d ch. 17. 10, &c. Dent, 12. 23. e Deut. 

ders it. The phrase points to some- 
what of more than usual festivitj^ 

25. Ill the fifth year shall ye eat of 
the fruit thereof, that it may yield unto 
you the increase thereof. Heb. t^^^Dini 
lri<izn S-^ lehosiph Idkem tebudtho, 
to add increasingly to you its product. 
The iniimation clearly is, that they 
would be no losers by waiting to the 
fifth year for the fruit of their trees. 
The forbearance would be rewarded by 
the far mere abundant fruitfulness of 
the trees themselves. 

Against the eating of Blood, and va- 
rious Superstitious Observances. 

26. Ye sha'l not eat any thing with 
the blood. Heb. dHH ^^ I^^DiOH Jj^i lo 
tokelu al hadddm, ye shall not eat upon 
the blood. Gr. jir] eaBere em opeojv eat 
not upon the mountains, i. e. after the 
manner of idolaters ; an erroneous ren- 
dering, arising from the translators 
having mistaken tl^in hadddm, blood, 
for tD^tl hdrim, mountains, 1 (r) for 
1 (d), as they have done in numerous 
other instances. The sense is intrinsi- 
cally good and warranted by Ezek. 
18. 6, but is not the meaning here in- 
tended ; although it is not perfectly 
obvious what the true meaning really is. 
The Rabbinical commentators for the 
most part, understand it, especially from 
its connexion with what follows, as a 
prohibition of certain idolatrous rites 
practised in the religion of the heathen, 
in which they entered into communion 
with demons by gathering the blood of 
their sacrifices into a vessel, or a little 
hole dug in the earth, and then sitting 
round it, feeding upon the flesh of the 
victims. But a more probable interpre- 
tation is that suggested by the usage of 
the same phrase, 1 Sam. 14. 33, ' Then 

18* 



26 H d Ye shall not eat any thing 
with the blood : e neither shall ye 
use enchantment, nor observe 
times. 

18. 10, 11, 14. I Sam. 15.23. 2 Kings 17. 
17, and 21. 6. 2 Chron. 33. 6. Mai. 3. 5. 

they told Saul, saying, Behold, the peo- 
ple sin against the Lord, in that they 
eat with the blood (S^H ilS^ al hadddm, 
upon the blood). ^ What is meant by 
this we infer from v. 32, of the same 
chapter ; ' And the people flew upon 
the spoil, and took sheep and oxen, and 
calves, and slew them upon the ground, 
and the people did eat them with the 
blood (S^n ^5> al hadddm, upon the 
blood). ^ From this it would appear 
that the phrase to eat any thing upon 
the blood, means to eat the flesh of the 
animal before it is fully dead, and the 
blood thoroughly drained from it. Thus 
Maimonides ; ' It is unlawful to eat of 
a slain beast so long as it trembleth ; 
and he that eateth thereof before the 
soul (life) of it be gone out, transgress- 
eth against a prohibition, Ye shall not 

eat upon the blood.' IT Neither shall 

ye use enchantments. Heb. Ti^nDtl ^^ 
lo tena^hashu, ye shall not practice au- 
gury or divination. It is the root with 
which lL'n2 na^hash, a serpent, is so 
intimately connected, and the true force 
of which is elucidated in the Note on 
Gen. 3. 1. It refers to the superstitious 
observance of omens, and perhaps 
mainly such ceremonies as were under- 
stood by the term ophiomancy, or divi- 
nation by serpents, similar to which 
was the art of ornithomancy, or augury 
by birds. This is Bochart's opinion, 
who has gone into the subject, as usual, 
at great length. IF Nor observe times. 

j Heb. IjjIS^n HO ^0 teonenu. The doubt- 
ful origin of the word makes the sense 
doubtful. Aben-Ezra and many others 

' consider the verb as a denominative 
from the root 'pS? dndn, a cloud, and 
understand it here to be equivalent to 
taking omens from the aspect of the 
clouds J and other celestial phenomena — 



210 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



27 f Ye shall not round the cor- 
ners of your heads, neither shalt 
thou mar the corners of thy beard. 

f ch. 21. 5. Jer. 9. 26, and 43. 37. Isai. 
15. 2. 

a species of divination to which respect 
seems to be had, Jer. 10. 2, where the 
prophet forbids the people to be ' dis- 
mayed at the signs of heaven^ at which 
the heathen are dismayed.^ To this 
interpretation Pvosenmuller gives the 
preference. Jarchi, on the other hand, 
who is followed by Fuller (Miscel. 
Sacr. L 1. c. 16) gives the noun TOI^ 
oncfi as the etymon which is defined 
a set, fixed, or prescribed time. The 
phrase, therefore, ^ to observe times' is 
supposed to imply the noting of certain 
days as more lucky than others, and 
selecting such as the days on which to 
commence a journey, or undertake any 
particular business or enterprise. This 
is probably the true sense, whether the 
etymology above suggested be correct 
or not, about which there is considerable 
doubt. We may remark that the Gr. has 
opviOoGKOTrriceaOcj signifying augury by 
birds • while the Syriac employs a term 
implying fascination by the eye, as if 
'I^S? ayin, eye, were the root. It seems 
impossible to decide with confidence 
the exact import. But while we are 
left in doubt about the precise meaning 
of a term, we are at no loss to discover 
the general scope and ground of the 
precept. The giving heed to vain signs 
and prognostics, the turning to the de- 
lusive arts of astrology, or fortune-tell- 
ing, would naturally beget a disregard 
and a practical denial of the doctrine 
of an over-ruling Providence, which was 
ever to be an object of cordial belief 
and unreserved trust to the pious mind. 
27. Ye shall not round the corners 
of your head. That is, shall not so 
shave off the hair of the head around 
the temples and behind the ears as to 
leave the head wholly bald, except a 
dish-like tuft upon the crown. This 



28 Ye shall not g make any cut- 
tings in your flesh for the dead, nor 
print any marks upon you : I am 
the Lord. 

g ch, 21. 6. Deut. 14. 1. Jer. 16. 6, and 

4S. 37. 

was in opposition to the usages of the 
heathen. The precept in the following 
clause relative to the beard is of equiv- 
alent import. They were to let it 
grow equally over all the lower part of 
of the face. 

28. Ye shall not make any cuttings 
in your fiesh for the dead. Heb.lZ^^Dj) 
lenephesh, for a soul; but this is the 
sense of the Heb. term in repeated in- 
stances, as Lev. 21, Num. 6. 6, Hag. 
2. 13. They were not to maim or lace- 
rate their persons in any manner in 
their mourning ceremonies, as with the 
vain idea of pacifying or propitiating 
the infernal spirits in behalf of the dead, 
a notion very prevalent among the 
heathen idolaters. Mourning habits 
they might put on, if they chose, and, 
with the exception of the high-priest, 
rend their garments in token of grief; 
but they were not to disfigure their 
bodies. This would be utterly unbe- 
coming a people who were instructed to 
a better knowledge of a future state and 
of the invisible world than the ignorant 
heathen could be supposed to possess. 

^ Nor print any marks upon you. 

' This is understood to forbid the prac- 
tice of tattooing, that is, by means of 
colors rubbed over minute punctures 
made in the skin, to impress certain 
figures and characters on difiTerent parts 
of the body, and which in general re- 
main indelible throughout life. The 
figures thus impressed on the arms and 
breasts of our sailors will serve in some 
degree to indicate the sort of ornament 
intended. It is well known to be com- 
mon among savages and barbarians in 
almost all climates and countries — the 
aboriginal inhabitants of our own coun- 
try not excepted, who, from having 
their naked bodies profusely ornament- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIX. 



211 



29 ^ ^ Do not prostitute thy 
daughter to cause her to be a 

1^ Deut. 23. 17. 



ed. apparently in this style, were de- 
scribed by the Romans as painted sav- 
ages. It secnis in England to be more 
commonly regarded as a custom of sav- 
age islanders than as any thing more. 
Yet it is also an Oriental custom 5 and 
that too among people whose proximity 
to the Hebrews affords a reason for the 
interdiction. The Bedouin Arabs, and 
those inhabitants of towns who are in 
any v.-ay allied to them, are scarcely 
less fond of such decorations than any 
islanders of the Pacific Ocean. This is 
particularly the case among the females, 
who in general have their legs and arms, 
their front from the neck to the waist, 
and even their chins, noses, lips, and 
other prominent parts of the face dis- 
figured with blue stains in the form of 
flowers, circles, bands, stars, and various 
fanciful figures. They have no figures 
of living- objects, such being forbidden 
by their religion : neither do they asso- 
ciate any superstitions v/ith them, so 
far as we were able to ascertain. They 
probably did both before the Moham- 
medan era, as their descendants in the 
island of Malta do at present. The 
men there generally go about without 
theirjacketSj and with their shirt sleeves 
lucked up above their elbows, and we 
scarcely recollect ever to have seen an 
arm thus bare which was not covered 
with religious emblems and figures of 
the Virgin, or of some saint under 
whose immediate protection the person 
thus marked conceived himself to be. 
Thus also, persons who visit the holy 
sepulchre and other sacred places in 
Palestine, have commonly a mark im- 
pressed upon the arm in testimony of 
their meritorious pilgrimage. The 
Hindoos also puncture upon their per- 
sons representations of birds, trees, and 
the gods they serve. Among them the 
representations are sometimes of a 
highly offensive description. All Hin- 



whore: lest the land fiiU to whore- 
dom, and the laud become full of 
wickedness. 

doos have a black spot, or some other 
mark, upon their foreheads. It was 
probably the perversion of such figures 
to superstitious purposes, or being worn 
in honor of some idol, which occasioned 
them to be interdicted in the text before 
us — if such tattooing is really that 
which is here intended. As the marks 
are indelible, w^e of course, in taking 
this view, consider that a permanent 
fashion rather than a temporary mourn- 
ing usage is here prohibited.' — P. Bib, 

Against Prostitution. 
29. Bo not prostitute thy daughter^ 
&c. Heb. njnri Jd^ al te^hallel, do not 
make abominable or profane. Gr. ov Pepn- 
/\ojc-£ij thou shalt not profane J desecrate^ 
or pollute. This alludes to the abom- 
inable custom of the heathen, among 
whom the w^omen prostituted them- 
selves in their temples as an act of re- 
ligion. At Babylon this was done, ac- 
cording to Herodotus, by w^omen of all 
ranks, before they were mai-ried ; and 
from the follov/ing remarks of Mr. 
Roberts (Orient. lUust.) it appears that 
the same depraved practice is still kept 
up in India. — ^Parents, in consequence 
of a vow or some other circumstance, 
often dedicate their daughters to the 
gods. They are sent to the temple, at 
the age of eight or ten years, to be in- 
itiated into the art of dancing before 
the deities, and of singing songs in 
honcr of their exploits. From that 
period these dancing girls remain in 
some sacred buildir^g near the temple ; 
and when they arrive at maturity (the 
parents being made acquainted with the 
fact), a feast is made, and the poor girl 
is given into the embraces of some in- 
fluential man of the establishment* 
Practices of the most disgusting nature 
then take place, and the young victim 
becomes a prostitute for life.' From 
all such horrid abominations the sane- 



212 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



30 H i Ye shall keep my sabbaths, 
and k reverence my sanctuary: I 
am the Lokd. 

31 H 1 Regard not them that have 

i ver. 3. ch. 26. 2. k Eccles. 5. 1. 

luaryofGod was to be kept free, and 
all licentiousness among the people at 
large to be discouraged to the utmost. 
It can hardly be supposed that any 
parent would be so far lost to all the 
instincts of natural affection, as know- 
ingly and of set design to surrender a 
beloved daughter to a life of infamy, 
degradation, and sin ; but he might do 
this indirectly, by not restraining her 
from such customs and associations as 
would tend to lead to it ; and it is the 
usual idiom of the Scriptures to speak 
of that as actually done by a person 
which he does not prevent when it was 
in the power of his hand to do it. 
Whether the prohibition is pointed 
against the exposing of daughters to 
prostitution as a part of religion, is, 
we think, considerably doubtful, al- 
though it may have been so. But there 
is no room to question that the explana- 
tion above given is true at any rate. 
Parents were not to prostitute their 
daughters by suffering them to he ex- 
posed to the danger of prostitution. 

Enjoining Reverence of the Sabbath 
and the Sanctuary. 

30. Ye shall keep my sabbaths and 
reverence my sanctuary. These pre- 
cepts are doubtless here conjoined from 
the intimate relation which the observ- 
ance of the one has to that of the other. 
Neglect or profanation of the Sabbath 
not only accompanies, but in great mea- 
sure consists in, the habitual disregard 
of the worship of the sanctuary. 

Against consulting Wizards and them 
which have Familiar Spirits. 

31. Regard not them that have fa- 
miliar spirits. Heb. nas^n ^J5^ ID&n )i^ 
al tiphnu el hciobothj turn not to the 



familiar spirits, neither seek after 
wizards, to be defiled by them: I 
am the Loud your God. 

1 Exod. 22. 18. ch. 20. 6, 27. Deut. 18. 10* 
1 Sam. 28. 7. 1 Chron, 10. 13. Isai. 8. 19. 
Acts IG. 16. 



oboth. Go not after them to consult 
them, nor follow their directions. Gr. 

OVK eirascoXovOrjaeaOej follow not. We 
give the term oboth without translating, 
because we have no English word that 
precisely answers to it. Its literal 
sense is that of leathern bottles or 
water-skins, which would of course be 
in a state of distension or swelling when 
filled with water. This circumstance 
seems to have been the ground of ihe 
application of the term to sorcerers, 
necromancers, or ventriloquists, (Gr. 
syyadrpinvdoi, speakers out of the belly), 
who, in the practice of their pretended 
magical rites and incantations, and 
while under the alleged influence of 
the inspiring demon, became greatly 
inflated, and in that state uttered their 
oracles, as if the spirit himself spoke 
from within them. The Chal. has y^l'l 
biddin, pythons, to which we have a 
distinct allusion Acts 16. 16, * And it 
came to pass as we went to prayer, a 
certain damsel possessed with a spirit 
of divination (Gr. -rrvevixa rrvdcovos, spirit 
of python), met us,' &c. Python was 
a name of Apollo, and this damsel was 
actuated as his priests or priestesses 
were supposed to be in delivering ora- 
cles at Delphos. She was doubtless 
of the class of persons denounced in 
this passage. Grammatically, we sup- 
pose, nilQ&5 oboth in this place requires 
the supply of the word ^5?^ baal, 
or tli^ln baalath, master or mistress of 
Ob, as it is expressed 1 Sam. 28. 7, in 
respect to the witch of Endor, who is 
called ^1i^ Sn^5>^ baalath ob, mistress 
of Ob, but translated in our version one 
that * had a familiar spirit.' So by a 
like figure of speech ^ spirits ' is used 
for ' spiritual gifts,' and for those who 
exercise them, 1 Cor. 14. 12,3.2.-1 John 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XIX. 



213 



32 1[ m Thou slialt rise up before | 33 % And o if a stranger sojoura 

with thee in your land, ye shall 
not vex him. 



the hoary head, and honour the 
face of the old man, and » fear thy 
God : I aj7i the Lord. 

m Prov. 20. 29. 1 Tim. 5. 1. n ver. 14. 

4. 1. ^ Neither seek after wizards. 

Heb. d'^j^^T^ yiddeonirri) knowing ones. 
The term in its radical meaning implies 
knowledge (from "^^^ ydda^to know), 
and is here applied to men as the pre- 
ceding is to women. It is agreed that 
the v.'ord denotes generally those who, 
by means of magical and cabalistic 
arts, professed to become acquainted 
with future events, to know the good or 
evil that awaited human life. They 
are joined with the masters or possess- 
ors of ' familiar spirits ' above-men- 
tioned, as like them in sin, and both 
w^ere to be put to death by the magis- 
trate, according to ch. 20. 27, which 
contains the penalty of this crime. ' A 
man also or a woman that hath a fa- 
miliar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall 
surely be put to death : they shall stone 
them with stones : their blood shall be 
upon them.' The reason for this pre- 
cept's coming in juxta-position with the 
former enjoining reverence of the sanc- 
tuary is thus intimated in the paraphrase 
of R. Chazkuni : — ' Ye shall reverence 
my sanctuary ; therefore turn not to 
them that have familiar spirits, nor to 
wizards ; for what have you to do with 
such? Behold, you have a sanctuary 
wherein is Urim and Thummim.' 

Respect to be shown to the Aged. 
32. Thou shalt rise up before the 
hoary head. Heb. HiQ^tD ^l3iD^ mippene 
shcbdh, before the greyness or hoari- 
ness ; the abstract for the concrete, as 
in numerous other instances. Chal. 
' Him that is skilful in the law.' How 
much praise have the Spartan institu- 
tions justly obtained for cherishing this 
principle, yet hov/ much more energetic 
and authoritative is the language of the 
Jewish code, coming as it does directly 
from Jehovah himself .' In command- 



Exod. 22. 21, and 23. 9. 



ing reverence to be paid to the aged, he 
in fact ordains it to that which is a feeble 
image of his own eternity. He is de- 
nominated the ^ Ancient of days,' and 
when he is represented as having ' the 
hair of his head like the pure wool,' he 
is pleased to represent himself as hav- 
ing the distinguishing characteristic of 
old age. There is probably no object 
in creation so fitted to inspire reverence 
as the sight of the snowy locks of the 
old man, and consequently the duty here 
enjoined has been recognized in all civi- 
lized nations, as one the violation of 
which is deserving of the severest pun- 
ishment. Even a heathen Juvenal (Sat. 
13.) could say — ' Hoc grande nefas, et 
morte piandum, si juvenis vetulo non 

assurrexerat.' IT And fear thy God. 

Heb. "l^ni^^;^ Djs^^'^ ydrethd meelohekd, 
fear from (before) thy gods. That is, 
as many of the Jewish writers under- 
stand it, reverence thy judges or magis- 
trates j who are repeatedly called D'^H^^^ 
Elohim, gods, in the sacred writings. 
They suppose accordingly that there 
are three degrees or ranks of men im- 
plied in this verse towards each of 
which becoming tokens of honor and 
reverence are here expressly enjoined j 
(1.) the aged in general ; (2.) the wise 
and learned; (3.) judges and magis- 
trates. But if taken as read in our 
translation, it clearly shows how inti- 
mate is the connexion in God's sight, 
between a devout fear of himself and a 
becoming reverence of those who are 
his most natural representatives to the 
eyes of m.ortals. 

The Stranger not to be oppressed, 

33. If a stranger sojourn with thee in 

your land ye shall not vex him. Heb. 

Ifii^ ^T\t] ^Jd lo tonu otho, ye shall not 

afflict J oppress him, Gr. ov OXiiLsTa avrov 



214 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



34 vBiit the stranger that dwell- 
eth with you, shall be unto you as 
one born among you, and q thou 
shalt love him as thyself; for ye 
were strangers in the land of 
Egypt : I am the Lord your God. 

35 1[r Ye shall do no unrighteous- 
ness in judgment, in mete-yard, in 
weight, or in measure. 

36 sjust balances, just weights, 

P Exod. 12. 48, 49. q Deut. 10. 19. r ver. 15. 
s Deut. 25. 13, 15. Prov. 11. 1, and 16. 11, 
and 20. 10. 



ye shall not afflict him. By the Targum 
of Jonathan and by Sol. Jarchi, it is 
understood of vexations of words, such 
as saying to him, ' Yesterday thou wast 
an idolater, and now ihou comest to 
learn the law which was given from the 
mouth of God.' It is supposed that the 
stranger was not an idolater, but a 
"worshipper of the God of Israel, though 
not circumcised ; a proselyte of right- 
eousness. If such an one sojourned 
among them, they must not vex him, 
nor oppress, nor overreach him in a 
bargain, taking advantage of his igno- 
rance of their laws and customs ; they 
must reckon it as great a sin to cheat a 
stranger, as to cheat an Israelite. As 
all men are children of one common 
father, it argues a generous disposition 
and a pious regard to God to show kind- 
ness to strangers. 

Enjoining just Measures, Weights, and 
Balances. 
35. Ye shall do no unrighteousness 
in judgment. The word 'judgment ' in 
this connexion is very plausibly referred 
by the Hebrew writers to all the par- 
ticulars that follow. On this construc- 
tion it is held, that Moses uses the word 
here in order to intimate of what sol- 
emn moment he would have the law 
considered, which relates to true mea- 
sures and weights. The man that falsi- 
fied either was to be regarded as a 
corrupter of judgment, an emphatic 
designation, equivalent to vile, wicked, 



a just ephah, and a just bin shall 
ye have : I am the Lord your God, 
which brought you out of the land 
of Egypt. 

37 t Therefore shall ye observe all 
my statutes, and all my judgments, 
and do them : I am the Lord. 

CHAPTER XX. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 

t ch. IS. 4, 5. Deut. 4. 5, 6, and 5. 1, and 
6. 25. 

abominable in a very high degree. 
IT In mete-yard. Heb. fn?2^ bammid- 
ddh ; a measure of length or surface, 
such as the yard, cubit, foot, span, &c. 

IT In weight. Heb. ^pID^n ham- 

mishkol ; such as the talent, shekel, 

&c. fr In measure. Heb. rTl1tD)2D 

bammesurdh ; by which is denoted 
measures of capacity, such as the ho- 
mer, ephah, seah, hin, &c. In all these 
articles, as well as in the balances or 
scales, weight-stones, &c., mentioned 
in the next verse, they were to observe 
the most honest exactness, and never 
allow themselves to practise any spe- 
cies of fraud in their dealings and com- 
merce, because they might not think it 
of easy detection. 

In view of the general contents of 
this chapter, who can but feel how ad- 
mirable are such language and senti- 
ments, and how suited to the sacred 
original from which they flow ! How 
strongly do they attest the divine be- 
nevolence which dictated the Jewish 
law, and the divine authority which 
alone could enforce such precepts by 
adequate sanctions, and impress such 
sentiments upon the human heart with 
practical conviction ! 



CHAPTER XX, 
The principal scope of the present 
chapter is to specify the punishments 
which it pleased God to annex to the 
transgression of the laws contained in 
the two preceding chapters. As we 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XX. 



215 



2 a Again thou shalt say to the 
children of Israel, ^ Whosoever he 
he of the children of Israel, or of 
the strangers that sojourn in Israel, 
that giveth any of his seed unto 
Molech, he shall surely be put to 

a ch. 18. 21. b ch. 18. 21. Deut. 12. 31, 

Ij and 18. 10. 2 Kings 17. 17, and 23. 10. 2 

Chron. .33. 6. Jer. 7. 31, and 32. 35. Ezek. 

20. 26, 31 

have already had occasion to consider 
most of ihem in connexion with the 
parallel precepts in ch. 18, there remains 
little to be said by way of additional 
comment. 

Against the giving of Seed to Molech. 
2. Whosoever he be, &c. Heb. '©'^fc^ 
tS'^fl^ a man, a man. The law had res- 
pect as much to proselytes who had 
embraced the Hebrew faith, as to native 

Israelites. IT That giveth any of his 

seed unto Molech. That is, any of his 
children. On the name and character 

of this idol, see note on Lev. 18.21. 

IT He shall be surely put to death. Heb. 
tl^T^ im)2 moth yumdth, dying he shall 
he made to die. So afterwards, in vv. 

9, 10, 11,12, &c. ^ The people of the 

land. That is, the inhabitants of that 
region in which he dwells. Chal. ' The 

people of the house of Israel.' 

IT Shall stone him with stones. This 
was the principal capital punishment in 
use among the Jews, and the mode of it 
was as follows : — When the criminal 
arrived within four cubits of the place 
of execution, he was stripped naked, ex- 
cept a slight covering about the loins, 
and his hands being bound, he was led 
up to the fatal spot, which was an emi- 
nence about twice the height of a man. 
The first executioners of the sentence 
were the witnesses, who generally pulled 
off their clothes for that purpose. One 
of them threw him down with great 
violence upon his loins ; if he rolled 
upon his breajst, he was turned upon his 
loins again ; and if he died by the fall, 
the sentence of the law was executed ; 



death : the people of the land shall 
stone him with stones. 
3 And c I will set my face against 
that man, and will cut him off 
from among his people ; because 
he hath given of his seed unto 
Molech, to ^' defile my sanctuary, 
and e to profane my holy name. 

c ch. 17. 10. d Ezek. 5. 11, and 23. 38, 39 
e ch. 18. 21. 

but if not, the other witness took a great 
stone and dashed it on his breast as he 
lay upon his back ; and then, if he was 
not despatched, all the people that stood 
by, threw stones at him till he died. 

3. I will set my face against that man. 
Heb. "pl^ etten, will give ; i. e. will op- 
pose, will fix firmly my face ; for which 
we have in v. 5 another and more appro- 
priate original word for set {'^tTi'DID 
samti). It might reasonably be asked, 
in what sense God here threatens the 
cutting off an offender, who is at the 
same time represented as having beea 
stoned to death in the preceding verse. 
To this it is answered by the Jewish 
critics, that the meaning is, that where 
the sin was not known, or there was 
not a sufficient amount of proof to con- 
vict the offender of the crime, there 
God would interpose, and by his own 
act ^ cut him off,' by some extraordinary 
judgment, from among his people. But 
as this case would seem rather to be in- 
cluded in that mentioned vv. 4, 5, we 
prefer to consider the punishment de- 
nounced in this passage as identical 
with the ^ stoning ' of v. 2. The Most 
High declares that in this way his 
judicial purpose shall be executed. The 
threatening is of fearful import. That 
infliction must be awful indeed, in which 
the sufferer sees the human agents 
merely carrying into effect a divine 
sentence which decrees his destruction. 

IT To defile my sanctuary • — which 

which was defiled when God was pro- 
fessedly worshipped in any other place 
or in any other manner than he had 
commanded : or when sacrifices were 



216 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



4 And if the people of the land 
do any ways hide their eyes from 
the man, when hegivethof hisseed 
•unto Molech, and f kill him not ; 

5 Then g I will set my face against 
that man, and ^ against his family, 
and will cut him off, and all that 
igo a w^horing after him, to com- 
mit whoredom whh Molech, from 
among their people. 

f Deut. 17. 2, 3, 5. S ch. 17. 10. h Exod. 
20. 5. i ch. 17. 7. 

offered by his people to false gods ; in- 
asmuch as the temple of God hath no 

agreement with idols. IF And to 

pi'ofane my holy name. Heb. ^^Jli 
ie^haUely the same word as that employ- 
ed Lev. 19. 29, ' Do not prostitute 
(i^nn tehalltl) thy daughter/ &c. 
The name of God is profaned, dese- 
crated, made abominable, when the 
honor and reverence due to him alone is 
lavished upon idols. See Note on Lev. 
18.21. 

4. If the people of the land do any 
ways hide their eyes. Heb. tD^S^H 
1)2 '^ii^'^ haHem ya^lim, hiding do hide. 
Gr. vTTEpoipsL vnepiSdicnv, with winking 
shall wink at ; i. e. shall overlook, dis- 
regard, neglect to punish. The Gr. 
word is the same with that occurring. 
Acts 17. 30, ' And the times of this ig- 
norance God winked at (viT€piSojv)j but 
now commandeth,' &c. 

5. Then Iivill setmyface, kc. Chal. 
' I will set mine anger against that man 
and his helpers.' Because others might 
wickedly connive at his offence, let him 
not therefore promise himself impunity. 
The eye of Omniscience would still be 
upon him, and the hand which no power 
could stay or elude would single him 
out for its stroke ; and not him only, 
hut the judgment, according to the usual 
analogy of Providence, would embrace 
the circle of his family, and involve 
others in its desolating effects. See 

Note on Joshua, 7. 15. IT His family. 

Gr. rrjv (Tvyyeveiav avrov^ his kindred. 
—IT All that go a whoring after him. 



6 H And tthe soul that turneih 
after such as have familiar spirits, 
and after wizards, to go a whoring 
after them, I will even set my face 
against that soul, and will cut him 
off from among his people. 

7 If 1 Sanctity yourselves there- 
fore and be ye holy : for I a7n the 
Lord your God. 

8 ^ And ye shall keep my statutes, 

k ch. 19. 31. 1 ch. 1 1. 44, and 19. 2. 1 Pet. 
1. 16. m ch. 19. .37. 



Chal. ' All who err after him ;' the usual 
term for expressing idolatrous apostacy 
in that version. Gr. Travrag tovs hixovo- 
ovvras avTO), all who consent with him. 
The language is founded upon the pe- 
culiarly near and intimate relation, 
amounting in fact to a kind of conjugal 
union, between God and his covenant 
people, an infraction of which on their 
part was a virtual act of adultery. 

Of consulting Wizards. 

6. The soul that turneth after such 
as have familiar spirits, &c. The na- 
ture of the sin here alluded to has been 
already explained. Lev. 19, 31. The 
punishment denounced is the same ju- 
dicial ' cutting off ^ which we have be- 
fore had frequent occasion to consider, 
and of which a fuller exposition will be 
found in the Note on Gen. 17. 14. The 
case of Saul affords a melancholy in- 
stance of the execution of this fearful 
sentence ; 1 Chron. 10. 13, 14, ^ And 
Saul died for his transgression which 
he committed against the Lord, even 
against the word of the Lord, which he 
kept not, and also for asking counsel of 
one that had a familiar spirit, to inquire 
of it ; and inquired not of the Lord ; 
therefore he slew him, and turned the 
kingdom unto David.' As the act for- 
bidden was in its own nature idolatrous, 
it is characterized by the same oppro- 
brious term as that which is applied in 
the preceding verse to the service of 
Molech. 

7. Sanctify yourselves therefore) &c. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XX. 



217 



and do them : ° I am the Lord 
which sanctify you. 

9 H o For every one that curseth 
his father or his mother, shall be 
surely put to death : he hath cursed 
his father or his mother : p his 
blood shall be upon him. 

10 ^ And q the man that commit- 

n Exod. 31. 13. ch. 21. 8, Ezek. 37. 28. 
Exod, 21. 17. Deut. 27. 16. Prov. 20. 20. 
Matt. 15. 4. P ver. 11, 12, 13, 16, 27. 2 Sam. 
1. 16. q ch. 18. 20. Deut. 22. 22. John 8. 
4,0. 

This is not properly to be regarded as 
a separate and independent precept, but 
rather as an appendix to the preceding. 
The sanctity especially enjoined upon 
the chosen people consisted in great 
measure in their separation from the 
corrupt and idolatrous practices of the 
surrounding heathen ; and nothing was 
more natural than that such an injunc- 
tion should follow in close connexion a 
precept expressly denouncing a particu- 
lar form of idolatrous usage. It is as 
if he had said, ' Instead of conforming 
to these abominable and wicked rites, 
and thus contaminating yourselves with 
the guilt of necromancy and other ma- 
gical arts, sanctify yourselves^ i. e. keep 
yourselves aloof from all fellowship 
with these works of iniquity ; remember 
that ye are called to be a chosen and 
holy and peculiar people, for the Lord 
your God, whose ye are, is a holy God, 
infinitely separated from all these lying 
vanities which the heathen worship as 
gods.' 

Of cursing Parents. 
9. For every one that curseth his 
father or his mother, &c. Heb. i^p^ 
yekaU'e'l • of the genuine force of this 
word which radically signifies to make 
light of, and refers to any kind of speech 
which has a tendency to lessen our pa- 
rents in the eyes of others, or in any 
way to bring contempt upon them. See 
what is said in the Note on the fifth 
commandment, Ex. 20. 12. The verse 
19 



teth adultery with another man's 
wife, even he that committeth 
adultery with his neighbour's wife, 
the adulterer and the adulteress 
shall surely be put to death. 

11 r And the man that lieth with 
his father's wife, hath uncovered 
his father's nakedness: both of 
them shall surely be put to death : 
their blood shall be upon them. 

12 sAnd if a man lie with his 
daughter-in-law, both of them shall 

r ch. 18. 8. Deut. 27. 23. s ch. 18. 15. 



is introduced by the illative ' for ' as 
indicative of its close connexion with 
the precept contained in the preceding 
verse ; ' Be ye holy, and keep all my 
statutes, or otherv/ise my judgments 
will fall upon you, for every one that 
curseth, &c., shall be surely put to 
death ;' or as the Heb. has it, m^l"^ tTiJ2 
moth yumath, dying shall be made to 
die. The precise mode of execution is 
not specified, but it is understood to be 
by stoning. This form of capital pun- 
ishment is uniformly to be understood 

where no other is stated. ^ He hath 

cursed his father or his mother. This 
is repeated as by a kind of note of ex- 
clamation, to aggravate the enormity 
of the crime. He shall be put to death, 
for, with utter amazement be it said, 
he hath cursed his father or his mo- 
ther ! ! such a monster must surely die, 

^ His blood shall be upon him. 

That is, he shall be put to death as a 
malefactor justly condemned to die ; 
one who has brought his guilt upon his 
own head, and who can blame none but 
himself for the consequences. Chai. 
' He is guilty of death, ^ i. e. worthy to 
be killed. Gr. svo^o? earac, he shall be 
guilty. The death in this and all such 
cases was stoning. ^ Every place where 
it is said in the law, ' they shall be put 
to death ; their blood (be) upon them,' 
it is meant, by stoning.' — Maimonides 
in Ainsworth. 

10. See on Lev. 18. 20. 

11. See on Lev. 18.8. 



218 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



surely be put to death : t they have 
wrought confusion ; their blood 
shall be upon them. 

13 u If a man also lie with man- 
kind, as he lieth with a woman, 
both of them have committed an 
abomination : they shall surely be 
put to death ; their blood shall be 
upon them. 

14 xAndif a man take awife and 
her mother, it is wickedness : they 
shall be burnt with fire, both he 
and they : that there be no wick- 
edness among you. 

15 y And if a man lie with a 
beast, he shall surely be put to 
death : and ye shall slay the beast. 

16 And if a woman approach unto 
any beast, and lie down thereto, 
thou shalt kill the woman and the 
beast ; they shall surely be put to 
death ; their blood shall be upon 
them. 

17 z And if a man shall take his 
sister, his father's daughter, or his 
mother's daughter, and see her na- 
kedness, and she see his nakedness : 

t ch. 13. 23. u ch. 18. 22. Deut. 23. 17. 
See Gen. 19. 5. Judg. 19. 22. x ch. 18. 17. 
Deut. 27. 23. y ch. 18. 23. Deut. 27. 21. 
z ch. 18. 9. Deut. 27. 22. See Gen. 20. 12. 

12. See on Lev. 18. 16. 

13. See on Lev. 18. 22. 

14. See on Lev. 18. 17. IT They 

shall be burnt ivithfire. That is, after 
being stoned. See Note on Josh. 7. 15. 

15. 16. See on Lev. 18. 23. 

17. See on Lev. 18. 9. 

18. See on Lev. 18. 19. 

19. See on Lev. 18. 12. 

20. See on Lev. 18. 14. 

21. See on Lev. 18. 16. ^ They 

shall be childless. ^ This does not 
mean,' saysMichaelis, ' that God would 
miraculously prevent the procreation of 
children from such a marriage ; for God 
no where promises any continual mira- 
cle of this nature ; but only that the 
children proceeding from it should not 
be put to their account in the public 
registers j so that in a civil sense they 



it is a wicked thing ; and they shall 
be cut off in the sight of their peo- 
ple : he hath uncovered his sister's 
nakedness; he shall bear his in- 
iquity. 

18 a And if a man shall lie with 
a woman having her sickness, and 
shall uncover her nakedness ; he 
hath discovered her fountain, and 
she hath uncovered the fountain 
of her blood : and both of them 
shall be cut off from among their 
people. 

19 b And thou shalt not uncover 
the nakedness of thy mother's sis- 
ter, nor of thy father's sister : c for 
he uncovereth his near kin : they 
shall bear their iniquity. 

20 '^ And if a man shall lie with 
his uncle's wife, he hath uncov- 
ered his uncle's nakedness : they 
shall bear their sin : they shall die 
childless. 

21 e And if a man shall take his 
brother's wife, it is an unclean 
thing : he hath uncovered his bro- 
ther's nakedness; they shall be 
childless. 

22 1[ Ye shall therefore keep all 

a ch. IS. 19. See ch. 15. 24. b ch. IS, 12, 
13. c eh. 18. 6. d ch. 18. 14. e ch. 18. 16. 



would be childless. The Heb. word 
h'i'TiJ) aririj unfruitful^ has this mean- 
ing, and is applied to the case of a man 
who has children, but will not be heired 
by them. Thus in Jer. 22. 30, it is said 
of a king who certainly had children, 
though they did not receive his inherit- 
ance, ' Inscribe this man as childless ; 
for of his posterity none shall prosper, 
nor any sit upon the throne of David.' 
For the children of such a marriage 
would be ascribed to the deceased bro- 
ther ; and that, among the Israelites, 
where a man made so much of the honor 
of being called father, was a very sen- 
sible punishment. The lxx, Augus- 
tine, and Aben-Ezra, understood our 
text in this manner.' — Comment on L. 
of M. § 116. It mitst be admitted to 
be not a little remarkable, that God 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXI. 



219 



my f statutes, and all my judg- 
ments, and do them : that the land 
whither I bring you to dwell there- 
in, g spue you not out. 

23 iiAnd ye shall not walk in 
the manners of the nations which 
I cast out before you: for they 
committed all these things, and 
i therefore I abhorred them. 

24 But kl have said unto you, 
Ye shall inherit their land, and I 
will give it unto you to possess 
it, a land that floweth with milk 
and honey: I am the Lord your 
God, 1 which have separated you 
from other people. 

2o m Ye shall therefore put dif- 

f ch. IS. 26, and 19. 37. S ch. IS. 25, 28. 
h ch 18. 3, 24, 30. i ch. IS. 27. Deut. 9. 5. 
k Exod. 3. 17, and 6. 8. 1 ver. 26. Exod. 19. 
6, and 33. 16. Deut. 7. 6, and 14. 2. 1 Kings 
8. 53. m ch. 11. 47. Deut. 14. 4. 

should here threaten a punishment to 
be inliicted by his own special interpo- 
sition, when in every other case men- 
tioned he ordered it to be done by the 
agency of the magistrate. This gives 
considerable plausibility to the sugges- 
tion above quoted ; viz. that their child- 
ren should be bastardized ; at the same 
time, we cannot perceive that the case 
allows of so much positiveness of tone 
as is evident in the language of Mi- 
chaelis. 

Exhortations to Obedience. 
23. They committed all these things, 
and therefore I abhorred them. Heb. 
D^ fp^l vd'dkutz ham, and I was 
vexed with them. Ainsworth ; ^ I am 
irked with them.' Chal. ' My Word 
abhorreth them.' The language em- 
ployed has a fearful emphasis of import. 
It is much for the infinite Jehovah to 
say that he will punish men for their 
transgressions 5 but for him to say that 
he abhors them, that they are an offence 
and an abomination to him, is calculated 
not only to give us a most affecting idea 
of the hatefulness of their sin , but also of 
the degree of their punishment. For 



ference between clean beasts and 
unclean, and between uncleaa 
fowls and clean: ^and ye shall not 
make your souls abominable by 
beast or by fowl, or by any man- 
ner of living thing that creepeth 
on the ground, which I have sepa- 
rated from you as unclean. 

2Q And ye shall be holy unto me : 
for I the Lord am holy, and 
p have severed you from other peo- 
ple, that ye should be mine. 

27 ^ q A man also or a womaa 
that hath a familiar spirit, or that 
is a wizard, shall surely be put to 
death : they shall stone them with 
stones: r their blood shall he upoa 
them. 

n ch, 11. 43, ver, 7. ch. 19. 2. 1 Pet. 
1. 16. P ver. 24. Tit. 2. 14. q ch. 19. 31. 
Exod, 22. 18. Deut. 18. 10, 11. 1 Sam. 28. 
7, 8. r ver. 9. 



when the emotion in the divine mind is 
abhorrence, what must be the action of 
the divine judgments? Itwillbeseenthat 
the great argument by which the pecu- 
liar people are urged to obedience is 
the fact that they had been separated 
by a kind of holy external sequestra- 
tion from all other people, and they 
were consequently in like manner to be 
separated by a pre-eminent sanctity of 
Hfe, spirit, and demeanor. Their con- 
duct was to correspond wdth their dis- 
tinction, and if God says by the prophet 
(Is. 49. 2), 'Thou art my servant, O 
Israel, I will be glorious in thee,' they 
were so to govern their deportment as 
to verify the declaration. And surely 
when the Most High makes his people 
the depositaries of his glory, they have 
a motive to obedience than which it is 
impossible to conceive any stronger. 



CHAPTER XXI. 

Rules regulating the Priests^ Mourning* 
As the two or three previous chapters 
contain a mass of general rules enjoin- 
ing sanctity upon the people at large, 
we have here a special law pertainmg 



220 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



CHAPTER XXI. 

AND the Lord said unto Mo- 
ses, Speak unto the priests 
the sons of Aaron, and say unto 
them, a There shall none be defiled 
for the dead among his people: 

a Ezek. 44. 25. 

to the priests. As it was their office to 
make atonement, and see to the general 
purity of the people, it was important 
that they should study the greatest de- 
gree of personal purity themselves. 
The special ministers of the Most High 
were to keep themselves at a distance 
from every thing that savored in the 
least of uncleanness in the estimation 
of the people, lest they should counte- 
nance that which they were set apart to 
prevent. 

1. There shall none he defiled for the 
dead. Heb. ID&D^ lenephesh ; a term 
in repeated instances applied to a dead 
body. Gr. ev rats ipvxais, for souls. 
The spirit of the passage forbids that 
any priest should assist at laying out a 
dead body, or preparing it for interment. 
This defilement was contracted not only 
by touching a dead body, but by coming 
into a tent or house where a dead body 
lay, by touching the grave, or by bear- 
ing the dead. In such a case they be- 
came legally polluted for the space of 
seven days. Num. 19. 11, 14, and conse- 
quently disqualified for the service of 
God, and interdicted from converse with 
their fellow Israelites. According to 
the Heb. canons, this effect followed if 
one came within four cubits, or six feet, 
of the dead. Of the reasons of this pro- 
hibition, it may not be possible to speak 
with assurance. Leclerc observes, 
* Perhaps the chief reason why a human 
corpse was adjudged to be unclean was, 
because it speedily becomes putrid, 
especially in a hot climate ; whence 
those who aspired to a special clean- 
ness above others, abstained from any 
contact with it.' Bochart has collected 
a large mass of evidence to prove that 
the ancient Greeks and Romans held 



2 But for his kin, that is near unto 
him, that is, for his mother, and for 
his father, and for his son, and for 
his daughter, and for his brother, 

3 And for his sister a virgin, that 
is nigh unto him, which hath had 



that defilement was contracted from the 
same source. 

2. But for his kin that is near unto 
him. Heb. 1^^5< n^pH ^"1^12:^ lishero 
hakkaroh elauv , his remainder (of flesh) 
that is near unto him. See the import 
of this term explained in the Note on 
Lev. 18. 6. Compare also Ezek. 44. 25. 
The rule here laid down constitutes, of 
course, an exception to the general 
statute, founded upon a kind regard to 
the natural sympathies which grow out 
of the various tender relationships of 
life. It would have been an extreme' 
privation for one of the priestly order 
to have been prohibited from paying the 
last offices of afiection to a parent, a 
child, a brother, or sister. It is a beau- 
tiful exemplification of the great prin- 
ciple that God would ' have mercy and 
not sacrifice,' where the claims of both 
came in competition. The wife, it will 
be seen, is not expressly mentioned in 
this catalogue of kindred, but that she 
was included by implication, no one 
can doubt. And this, by the way, 
affords a strong confirmation of the prin- 
ciple we have before insisted upon in 
the interpretation of the marriage-laws, 
in Lev. 18., that the implied cases are 
equally forbidden with the express. 
The case of the prophet Ezekiel, ch. 
24. 16-18, is here directly in point. It 
was no doubt in virtue of an express 
command, suspending for the lime being 
the operation of this law, that he 
was forbidden to exhibit the usual sig- 
nals of mourning for his deceased wife, 
which would otherwise have been law- 
ful for him. 

3. Which hath had no husband. 
Whereas, had she been married, it 
would have been the duty of the sur- 



I 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXL 



221 



no husband : for her may he be 
defiled. 

4 But he shall not defile himself, 
being a chief man among his peo- 
ple, to profane himself 

5 b They shall not make baldness 

b ch. 19. 27, -28. Deut. 14. 1. Ezek. 44. 20. 

viving husband to see to the perform- 
ance of all the requisite rites at her 
burial, so that the priest her brother 
would have been excused. 

4. He shall not defile himself being a 
chief man among his people. Heb. 
1^?3!P!n ^*^^ haal beammauv, which (by 
supplying the probable ellipsis of J) 
for) , may be rendered ^ for a chief man.' 
Chal. Jj^^'l rabha, a master. That is, 
he shall not thus defile himself for any 
one that is not near of kin to him, 
though the dead person were a chief or 
the chiefest man among his people, even 
the high priest himself This is the 
version of the Vuig. Syr. and Arab., and 
is adopted by Ainsworth, Gill, Patrick, 
Dathe, Scott, A. Clarke, and others. 
The Gr. has strangely s^airiva, suddenly, 
which has probably arisen from some 
blunder in the reading of the original. 
As ^5>;n baal signifies in general a lord, 
master, possessor, and is sometimes 
applied to ^ master of a house,' the idea 
of Willet is not improbable, who 
thinks the meaning to be, that the priest, 
the master of the house, should mourn 
for none of the inmates except those 
mentioned above. Accordingly Luther 
renders it, ' He shall not defile him.self 
for any one who belongs to him. The 
marginal reading which Rosenmuller 
after Leclerc adopts, gives entirely ano- 
ther complexion to the passage ; — ' Be- 
ing a husband among his people, he 
shall not defile himself (for his wife),' 
&c. This makes it an express prohibi- 
tion of mourning for a wife, for which 
construction we can perceive no ade- 
quate grounds either in the nature of the 
case or the structure of the passage. 
But the matter is not of sufficient mo- 
ment to warrant an extended critical 
19* 



upon their head, neither shall they 
shave off the corner of their beard, 
nor make any cuttings in their flesh. 
6 They shall be holy unto their 
God, and c not profane the name of 
their God: for the offerings of the 

c ch. IS. 21, and 19. 12. 



discussion. We on the whole prefer the 
interpretation suggested by Willet, and 
confirmed by Luther. 

6. They shall not make baldness on 
their heads, &c. This was enacted that 
they might not adopt the customs of 
the heathen, of whom it is said in the 
apocryphal book of Baruch, 6. 31, that 
' their priests sit in their temples, with 
their clothes rent, and their heads and 
beards shaven, and having nothing upon 
their heads -, and they roar and cry be- 
fore their gods, as men do at the feast 
vi^here is dead.' See Note on Lev. 
19. 27, 28. « In ch. 19. 28, this is made a 
general law, not peculiar to the priests. 
They are here forbidden to do that 
which had already been prohibited to 
the people in general. There is a dif- 
ference of opinion as to the interpreta- 
tion of the text. Some think that it is 
to be understood generally, as interdict- 
ing the shaving of the beard. If thus 
understood, there seems an adequate 
reason for it in the contrary practice of 
the Egyptians, who did shave their 
beards ; and its repetition to the priests 
may have been to show them that they 
were not exempted from the general 
law, as they might have been led to 
conclude from having observed the pe- 
culiar scrupulosity of the Egyptian 
priests on this point, who, as we are 
informed by Herodotus, were particu- 
larly careful to shave all the hair off 
their bodies every third day. The other 
alternative is that which has the sanc- 
tion of our translation, and by which it 
appears we are to understand the whis- 
kers, or upper extremities of the beard. 
The object would then appear to be to 
keep them a distinct people from the 
Arabs, who either shaved their whis- 



222 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



Lord made by fire, and ^ the bread 
of their God they do offer : there- 
fore they shall be holy. 
7 e They shall not take a wife 

dSee ch. 3. 11. e Ezek. 44. 22. 

kers or cropped them short. We must 
not forget that it was one great object 
of many of the Mosaic laws to keep the 
Israelites separate from all the neigh- 
boring nations ; and, whether the Egyp- 
tians or the Arabs were in "view, it is 
certain that a different fashion of the 
beard would have a more marked effect 
in assisting such a distinction than can 
be readily calculated by those who hold 
that appendage in light esteem. That 
such a distinction as we have mentioned 
did exist, is not only manifested by 
existing usages, but by ancient accounts. 
Mohammed perceived the effect of this 
distinction — for many Jews resided in 
Arabia in his time — and strictly en- 
joined that it should be kept up. Ac- 
cording to the traditions, he used to clip 
his own whiskers ; and frequently said, 
* He who does not lessen his whiskers 
is not our ways :' and he expressly said 
that he inculcated this practice in oppo- 
sition to the Jews, who were not accus- 
tomed to clip either their beards or 
whiskers. In these counter regulations 
we seem here to perceive the object of 
the apparently trivial injunction of the 
Hebrew legislator.' — Pict. Bib. 

6. The offerings of the Lord made by 
fire and the bread of their God, do they 

offer. Heb. dn%ni5< Dni mn^ "^iDi^ 

ishe Yehovuh le^hem eloh'ehem, the fire- 
(offerings) of Jehovah, (even) the food 
of their God. Thus by a bold figure 
of speech are the sacrificial offerings 
denominated, which were devoured by 
fire to the honor of God, and nothing 
could well be said tending to give a 
higher idea of their office, or conse- 
quently to impose upon them more sol- 
emnly the duty of an exemplary sanc- 
tity in all their deportment. As the 
Israelites in general were separated 
from all other nations to be an holy 



that is a whore, or profane ; neither 
shall they take a woman fput away 
from her husband : for he is holy 
unto his God. | 

f See Deut. 24. 1, 2. 

people to the Most High, so the priests 
and Levites were in a manner separated 
from the rest of the Israelites with a 
like intent. 

Restrictions in respect to a PriesVs 
marrying. 
7. They shall not take a wife^ &c. 
The two words in the original are HDt i 

zonah, and niyfl halldldh, of which the 
latter, rendered profane, signifies, ac- 
cording to the Jews, not so much one 
that had been profaned or dishonored, 
in which case it would not differ essen- 
tially from the preceding, as one who 
was born of such a marriage as was for- 
bidden to the priests. For as it ap- 
pears from V. 9, that a daughter might 
profane her father, so a parent, on the 
other hand, might profane a daughter, 
and so disqualify her from marrying a 
priest. The daughter of a widow by a 
high priest, for example, would come 
under this denomination (v. 14) and so 
also the daughter of a divorced woman, M 
by the present verse. As the Gr., how- l| 
ever, has Pci^ri\u^ncvr]v, profaned, a sense 
quite as probable is, one that has been 
violated against her will, and that is not 
a voluntary prostitute, like the TOt zo- 
nah. The use of the epithet carries 
with it the striking implication that 
chastity invests the person with a pe- 
culiar sacredness, and that it cannot be 
lost without the desecration and profa- 
nation of that which is in a sense holy, 

like a consecrated temple. IT A wo- 

man put away. Heb. n!2j1^3 HIL'^ 
ishdh gerushCih, a woman driven away. 
Gr. EK/SsPXTjixevriv, cast out. The Heb. 
term is stronger than that (n^tL^^O me- 
shala^h) which is usually applied to 
the simple dismission involved in di- 
vorce. Yet there is no doubt that the 
^ putting away' here mentioned, was by 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXI. 



223 



8 Thou shalt sanctify him there- 
fore, for he ofTereth the bread of 
thy God : he shall be holy unto 
thee : g for I the Lord which sanc- 
tify you, am holy. 

g ch. 20.7, 8. 

means of a divorce. The presumption 
always was that a woman repudiated 
among the Israelites, was put away from 
her husband for some fault. It was not 
decorous, therefore, for a priest to blem- 
ish his good name by marrying a wo- 
man who lay under a suspicion of some- 
thing bad. IT He is holy unto his 

God. Set apart and consecrated in a 
peculiar manner to the service of God, 
and therefore not allowed to bring dis- 
credit upon his office by doing any thing 
of dubious character. 

8. Thou shalt sanctify him therefore. 
That is, thou, Israel, shalt, one and all, 
hold and repute him as holy, and shalt 
do all in thy power to keep up the sa- 
cred estimation in which, for his office's 
sake, he is held. It is possible, how- 
ever, that the address may be intended 
to be made to Moses, who was to sanc- 
tify the priest by commanding him to 
be sanctified, according to a very fre- 
quent idiom. 

Of the PriesVs Daughter who profanes 
herself 

9. The daughter of any priest. Heb. 
"piD llj^i^ ish kohtn, a man a priest. 
There is great unanimity among the 
Jewish commentators in understanding 
this of a woman who was married, or 
at least espoused. ' Our rabbins,^ say 
Aben Ezra and Sol. Jarchi, 'confess 
with one mouth that one not espoused 
is not concerned in this law.' But as 
the letter of the law contains no such 
limitation, it is doubtless safe to take it 
in its widest import. She is said by 
such conduct to pollute her father's 
name ; whereas if she were married, the 
wrong would be rather done to her hus- 
band. IT She profaneth her father, 

that is, brings disgrace upon him. Gr. 



9 H h And the daughter of any 
priest, if she profane herself by 
playing the whore, she profaneth 
her father : she shall be burnt 
with fire. 



h Gen. 38. 24. 



TO ovojxa Tov TTurpog avrrjs avrr] /SePrj^oij 
she profaneth her father^ s name. Chal. 
' She profaneth her father's holiness.' 
By Sol. Jarchi it is thus explained : 
' She profaneth and contemneth his hon- 
or, for that men will say of him, Cursed 
is he that begat this woman ; Cursed is 

he that brought her up.' IF She shall 

be burnt with fire. ' It seems, upon the 
whole, very doubtful whether this and 
other texts of the same import in the 
early books of the Old Testament, ex- 
press the punishment of burning alive, 
or of the ignominious burning of the 
body after execution. It is certain we 
have no instance of the former punish- 
ment ; but we have of the latter, as re- 
sulting from such a lav7 as that ex- 
pressed in the text. Thus in Josh 7. 15, 
it is declared that the unknown person 
who had taken of the accursed thing 
should be ' burnt with fire ;' and when 
the man w^as discovered, we find that 
this intention was executed not by burn- 
ing him alive, but by stoning him first 
and then burning his remains (v. 15). 
We therefore lean to the opinion, that 
stoning, being the common and well- 
known punishment, is understood in 
these texts, and that only the additional 
punishment of burning the body is ex- 
pressed. Michaelis thinks that burn- 
ing alive was not sanctioned by the 
Mosaic law ; but Home, who generally 
follows him, seems to consider that 
both burning alive and burning after 
death are among the punishments men- 
tioned by Moses j and it is rather odd 
that he cites the same texts in proof of 
both — namely, the one before us and 
that in the next chapter. The testimo- 
ny of the Rabbins is worth very little 
in this matter, as many capital punish- 
ments were in later times introduced, of 



224 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



10 i And he that is the high priest 
among his brethren, upon whose 
head the anointing oil was poured, 
and k that is consecrated to put on 
the garments, 1 shall not uncover 
his head, nor rend his clothes; 

i Exod. 29. 29, 30. ch. 8. 12, and 16. 32. 
Numb. 35. 25. k Exod. 28. 2. ch. 16. 32. 
1 ch. 10.6. 

which the law of Moses takes no notice. 
They say, that because the bodies of 
Nadab and Abihu were not consumed 
by the fire which slew them, it was 
thought unlawful to burn a criminal 
alive ; but that he was put to death by 
melted lead being poured down his 
throat. We may accept this so far as 
to show that persons were not consumed 
alive in the fire ; but we are bound to 
reject the other part, as wholly unsanc- 
tioned by the law of Moses. It is pos- 
sible that they may had this punish- 
ment in after times, when the meaning 
of the law had been greatly perverted 
by absurd glosses and inferences.' — 
Fid. Bib. 

Rules regulating the Conduct of the 
High Priest. 
10. He that is the high priest among 
his brethren. Heb. i)Ti:in yi'DT] 
I'^nji^^S hakkohen haggddol mee^hauv, 
the priest {that is) great among his 
brethren^ or, greater than his breth- 
ren. Gr. lepevs [xcyag^ the great 
priest ; from which the apostle, Heb. 
4. 14, applies the same title to Christ, 
of whom the Jewish high priest was a 
distinguished type. Sustaining, there- 
fore, this high character, the Hebrew 
pontiff was to be more especially stu- 
dious of his sanctity, both in avoiding 
defilement by the dead, and in his mar- 
riage. This, by the way, is the first 
time the title occurs in this form in the 

Scriptures. IT That is consecrated to 

put on the garments. That is, the 
golden garments, as they were called, 
which were peculiar to the high priest, 
and of which a full account is given. 



I 11 Neither shall he mgo in to any 
dead body, nor defile himself for 
his father or his mother ; 

12 n Neither shall he go out of 
the sanctuary, nor profane the 
sanctuary of his God ; for o the 



m Numb. 19. 14. See ver. 1, 2. n ch. 10. 
7. Exod. 28. 36. ch. 8. 9, 12, 30. 



Ex. 28. The Heb. phrase for ' conse- 
crated ' is 'whose hand is filled,^ i. e. 
with sacrifices for oflfering, as the Chah 
explains it, which the Gr. expresses by 
the word TcXeioco, to perfect. See the 
true import illustrated in the note on 

Ex. 29. 9. IF Shall not uncover his 

head. Heb. 5>1»D^ ^i^ TITa^'l rosho al 
yiphrdj shall not make free his head j 
i. e. shall not sufier his hair to go dis- 
hevelled and neglected, without trim- 
ming, in token of mourning. See the 
true force of the original term elucidat- 
ed, Judg. 5. 2. Chal. ' Let not his locks 
grow.' Gr. ovk airoKiSapcoaeij let him not 
put off his mitre. See Note on Lev. 
10.6. 

11. Neither shall he go in to any dead 
body. Heb. n^ niI2>:D i^: l^ al kol 
naphshoth meth, to any souls of the 
dead. Gr. ein naar] ipv^ll r£T£\evrr]KViaj 
to any soul that has died. Another in- 
stance in which the usual Heb. and Gr. 
terms for ' soul ' are used to signify 
' body.' See Note on Lev. 21. 1. The 
interdict here was very rigorous. He 
was not permitted to go into the house 
where his father or mother lay dead, 
though this v/as allowed to the inferior 
priests. 

12. Neither shall he go out of the 
sanctuary^ &c. That is, during the 
time that he was ofiicially engaged in 
the services of the sanctuary. It mat- 
tered not who of his family died j he was 
not to leave his post till his ministra- 
tions were finished. It is intimated 
that by so doing he would ' profane the 
sanctuary of his God,' i. e. would con- 
structively profane it by showing that 
he thought more of earthly relation- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXL 



225 



crown of the anointing oil of his 
God is upon him : I af?i the Lokd. 

13 And V he shall take a wife in 
her virginity. 

14 A widow, or a divorced wo- 
man, or profane, or an harlot, these 
shall he not take : but he shall 
take a virgin of his own people to 
wife. 

15 IS either shall he profane his 

P ver. 7. Ezek, 44. 22. 

ships than of his sacred functions ; that 
he postponed his dutj^ as a priest to 
his promptings as a man. The Gr. has 

fK ruiv ayitovj from the holy things. 

IT For the crown of the anointing oil of 
his God is upon him. Heb. '^^t.* ^T. 
rnr*^ nczer shemen jnish' hath, "^'hich 
may be understood in two ways ; either 
of the golden plate which is called ^TD 
n'izcr, a crown, Ex. 29. 6, and the 
anointing oil ; or the latter may be 
simply esegetical of the former, and 
oil may be called n£zcr, a crown or 
separation, because it was by it that he 
was separated from other men and other 
priests. So the Gr. evidently under- 
stands it, which has nothing answering 
to ' crown ' separate from the ^ oil,' 
ayiov eXaiov to ^pKrrov tov deov the holy 
oil, the chrism (or anointing) of his 
God. Adam Clarke very well remarks 
upon this, • By his office the (high) 
priest represented Christ in his sacri- 
ficial character ; by his anointing, the 
prophetic influence ; and by the croiL^ 
the regal dignity of our Lord.' 

13. He shall take a wife in her vir- 
ginity. Heb. n'^^iri^ bibthul't'ha in 
her virginity, a term derived from ^^D 
bathal, to separate, set apart, seclude ; 
and applied to a virgin from her being 
separated and secluded from intercourse 
with men, which is eminently the case 
in the East. Compare this and the fol- 
lowing verse with verse 7, where the 
prohibited marriages of common priests 
are mentioned. The difference is, that 
widows are mentioned among those 
whom the high priejst might not marry, 



' seed among his people: for ql the 
Lord do sanctify him. 

16 % And the Lord spake unto 
IMoses, saying, 

17 Speak unto Aaron, saying, 
Whosoever ?ie be of th}' seed in 
their generations that hath any 
blemish, let him not r approach to 
ofler the bread of his God : 

i q ver. 8. r ch. 10. 3. Numb. 16. 5. Ps. 
! 64. 4. ch. 3. 11. 

I 

but not among those with whom the 
common priest is forbidden to contract 
alliance. It would therefore seem that 
' the common priest was allowed to mar- 
ry a widow, as Josephus declares. Gro- 

■ tius and others, however, think that a 
priest could not marry any widow, but 

, one whose deceased husband had also 
j been a priest. This is inferred from 
! Ezek. 44. 22. The high priest, being 
; precluded from marrj'iug a widow, was 
j of course exempt from marrying the 
j widow of a brother who died without 
children. The Mohammedans have no 
I regulations on this subject, being, in 
! fact, without any distinct priestly order. 
: But in India it is not lawful for the 
priests to marry any but virgins. As 
the high priest was a type of Christ, 
his wife, who was to be a virgin, was 
a type of the church ; wherefore the 
apostle says, 2 Cor. 11.2, ^I have es- 
poused you to one husband, that I maj?- 
present ^^ou a chaste virgin to Christ.' 

15. Neither shall he profane his seed 
among the people. That is, he shall 
not render his sons unfit for the priest- 
hood by marrying contrary to the rules 

i above laid down. vv. 13, 14. IF For 

I the Lord do sanctify hi77i. That is, 
have separated him to my service. 

i 

■ Rules in regard to personal Blemishes. 
17. Whosoever he be of thy seed in 

\ their generations. That is, of thy sons 
I in any generation of th}" poste^it5^ The 
I address is made to Aaron, and by the 
sons of Aaron is always to be under- 
i stood his successors in the priestly of- 



226 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



18 For whatsoever man he be that 
hath a blemish, he shall not ap- 
proach : a blind man, or a lame, or 
he that hath a flat nose, or any- 
thing s superfluous. 

19 Or a man that is broken-footed, 
or brokea-handed. 

20 Or crook-backed, or a dwarf, 
or that hath a blemish in his eye, 
or be scurvy, or scabbed, or thath 
his stones broken ; 

21 No man that hath a blemish 
of the seed of Aaron the priest shall 
come nigh to ^ offer the offerings of 
the Lord made by fire ; he hath a 
blemish, he shall not come nigh to 
offer the bread of his God. 

22 He shall eat the bread of his 

s ch. 22. 23. t Deut. 23. 1. u ver. 6. 

fice. The directions therefore concern- 
ed the priests. It is made a standing 
law that no man whose person was any 
way disfigured by a blemish should 
minister at the altar. No individual of 
Aaron's line who was marked by pro- 
minent blemishes, defects, or superflu- 
ities ; by unseemly or ill-favored fea- 
tures ; by deformity in any part of his 
body, whether natural or accidental j 
or had any permanent distemper upon 
him, as scurvy itch, scurf, scab, &c., 
was admitted to the exercise of the 
priestly prerogative. This requirement 
is undoubtedly founded upon a just 
view of human nature, as men are prone 
to judge by the outward appearance, 
and to think meanly of any service, 
however honorable, which is performed 
by agents distinguished by personal de- 
fects. It was greatly for the credit of 
the sanctuar)^, therefore, that none 
should appear there, who were any way 
disfigured by nature or by accident, as 
it would be regarded as an indignity to 
the Deity to consecrate a blemished or 
imperfect man to his service. But 
whatever considerations of a subordi- 
nate nature may be urged for this stat- 
ute, the grand reason is undoubtedly to 
be found in the fact, that the priests, 



God, both of the ^ most holy, and 
of the y holy. 

23 Only he shall not go in unto 
the vail, nor come nigh unto the 
altar, because he hath a bleniish; 
that zhe profane not my sanctu- 
aries : for I the Lord do sanctify 
them. 

24 And Moses told it unto Aaron, 
and to his sons, and unto all the 
children of Israel. 

CHAPTER XXn. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2 Speak unto Aaron and to his 

X ch. 2. 3, 10, and 6. 17, 29, aud 7. 1, and 
24. 9. Numb. 18. 9. y ch. 22. 10, 11, 12. 
Numb. IS. 19. z ver. 12. 

both in their persons and their work, 
were types of Him who was the ' Lamb 
without blemish and without spot,' 
holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate 
from sinners. As the particular defects 
mentioned are sufficiently plain to pre- 
clude the necessity of comment, we 
barely remark, that although these de- 
fects disqualified the priests for the sa- 
cred functions, they did not exclude 
them from their prescribed mainte- 
nance, as is evident from v. 22, ^ He 
shall eat the bread of his God, both of 
the most holy and the holy.' 



CHAPTER XXII, 

Further Directions respecting the Min- 
istrations of the Priests. 
The same general subject is contin- 
ued in the present chapter as in the pre- 
ceding, viz. the specification of the va- 
rious causes which were to operate as 
impediments in the way of the priests' 
discharging their appropriate functions. 
Of these the prmcipal were the ceremo- 
nial uncleanness to which they might 
be subject. In the subsequent part of 
the chapter the scope of the lawgiver is 
to teach, that the sacrifices, as well as 
the offerers must be free from blemish, 
in order to be acceptable. 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXII. 



227 



sons, that they a separate them- 
selves from the holy things of the 
children of Israel, and that they 
t profane not my holy name in those 
things which they c hallow unto 
me : I am the Lord. 

8 Say unto them, Whosoever he 
he of all your seed among your 
generations, that goeth unto the 
holy things, which the children of 
Israel hallow unto the Lord, ^ hav- 
ing his uncleanness upon him, that 
soul shall be cut off from my pres- 
ence : I am the Lord. 

4 What man soever of the seed 
of Aaron is a leper, or hath e a run- 
ning issue; he shall not eat of the 
holy things, f until he be clean. 

a Numb. 6. 3. b ch. 18. 21. c Exod. 28. 
38. Numb. 18. 32. Deut 15. 19. d ch. 7. 
20. e ch. 15. 2. 

2. Speak unto Aaron and to his sonSj 
that they separate themselves from the 
holy things, &c. Heb. lltD*^ yinnazeru, 
that they be separated. The root of the 
verb is Itl] ndzar, to separate, from 
which comes • Nazarite,' one religious' 
ly separated from all secular relations. 
Gr. -poaax^roic-av airo rwv ayioiv, let them 
take heed- of the holy things. The pre- 
cept has respect to such of the priests 
as were ceremonially unclean. During 
the time that this uncleanness was upon 
them they were to abstain from eating 
the holy things which ordinarily belong- 
ed to the priests. ^ That they profane 

not my holy name. Heb. ^^1p QID shem 
kodshi^ the name of my holiness. But 
the equivalent rendering of our version 
is confirmed by the Gr. to ovofxa to ayi- 
ov [.lov, my holy name. The sanctuary 
would of course be profaned when its 
holy things were defiled, which they 
would be when offered or eaten by per- 
sons unclean, contrary to the express 
commandment of God. Compare vv. 
15, 32. 

3. Among your generations. That 
is, either now or at any time hereafter. 
^ That goeth unto the holy things. 



And g whoso toucheth any thing 
that is unclean by the dead, or ha 
man whose seed goeth from him ; 

5 Or i whosoever toucheth any 
creeping thing, whereby he may be 
made unclean, or ^a man of whom 
he may take uncleanness, whatso- 
ever uncleanness he hath : 

6 The soul which hath touched 
any such shall be unclean until 
even, and shall not eat of the holy 
things, unless he iwash his flesh 
with water. 

7 And when the sun is down, he 
shall be clean, and shall afterward 
eat of the holy things, because ^ it 
is his food. 



f ch. 14. 2, and 15. 13. ^Numb. 19. 11, 22. 
h ch. 15. 16. i ch. 11. 24, 43, 44. k ch. 15. 
7, 19. 1 ch. 15. 5. Heb. 10. 22. ^ ch. 21. 
22. Numb. 18. 11, 13. 



That is, for the purpose of eating, as is 

to be inferred from vv. 4, 6, 12. 

IF Shall be cut off from my presence. 
Heb. '^^t:)l2 mippene, from my face or 
presence ; with a latent allusion to the 
visible signal of the divine presence in 
the Shekinah of the tabernacle. The 
offender would be cut off before that, as 
were Nadab and Abihu. 

4. Unclean by the dead. Heb. Jisi^tD 
IDiDD teme nephesh, unclean (by) a soul. 
Gr. ''■pvxn, soul. For parallel usage see 
on Lev. 19. 28, and 21. 1, and of the na- 
ture of the uncleanness see Numb. 
19. 11, 14, 22. The uncleannesses ad- 
verted to m the next chapter are such 
as were contracted by leprosy, running 
of the reins, involuntary seed-flux ; 
touching the carcase of any forbidden 
creature ; eating of any animal that 
died of itself, or was torn to pieces by 
a ravenous beast or bird ; or by coming 
in contact with any person who was at 
the time legally unclean ; with similar 
instances, which have been considered 
in the previous chapters. 

6-9. Shall be unclean until even, &c. 
The priest thus rendered unclean was 
to remain like other Israelites, in a 



228 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



8 n That which dieth of itself, or 
is torn with beasts^ he shall not eat 
to defile himself therewith : I am 
the Lord. 

9 They shall therefore keep mine 
ordinance, o lest they bear sin for 
it, and die therefore, if they profane 
it : I the Lord do sanctify them. 

10 p There shall no stranger eat 
of the holy thing : a sojourner of 
the priest, or an hired servant, 
shall not eat of the holy thing. 

n Exod. 22. 31, ch. 17. 15. Ezek. 44. 31, 
o Exod. 28. 43. Numb. 18. 22. 32. P See 1 
Sam. 21. 6. 

state of separation for a day, i. e. till 
sunset, and be incapable of all priestly 
offices and privileges till he had washed 
his clothes and his body, and this under 
the penalty of ^ bearing sin,' or suffer- 
ing condign punishment by being cut 
off by the immediate hand of God, as 
a bold profaner of his service. 

Strangers, Sojourners, and Hired Ser- 
vants interdicted from eating the 
Holy Things. 

10. There shall no stranger eat of 
the holy thing. That is, not one of 
another nation, a foreigner, but one that 
is not of the seed of Aaron, of the family 
of some priest, is not to be maintained 
by him out of his share of the sacrifices. 

fT Sojourner. Heb. ^^DIlD tosh'ih, 

from u^^ ydshab, to dwell. Gr. napoLKos, 
a stranger-resident. By a ' sojourner 
of the priest' is to be understood one 
that should be a boarder or lodger with 
him, a transient inmate of his house. 
Such an one was not to eat of the con- 
secrated things, but was to live upon 
what accrued to the priest from his 
common tithes. So also with the hired 
servant. 

11. If the priest buy any soul with 
his money. Heb. y^'^p XO^^ nDp*^ ^^ 
ISt^lD ki yikneh nephesh kinyan kispho, 
when he shall buy a soul the purchase 
of his money. It is evident from this 
that there were among the ancient He- 
brews persons who were bought with 



11 But if the priest buy any soul 
with his money, he shall eat of it, 
and he that is born in his house : 
qthey shall eat of his meat. 

12 If the priest's daughter also be 
married unto a stranger, she may 
not eat of an offering of the holy 
things. 

13 But if the priest's daughter be 
a widow, or divorced, and have no 
child, and is r returned unto her 
father's house, « as in her youth, she 

q Numb. IS. 11, 13. rGen. 38. 11. s ch. 
10. 14. Numb. 18. 11, 19. 

money. At the same time it by no 
means follows, that the slavery which 
existed among them was of a nature 
similar to that \vhich is unhappily es- 
tablished among us, or which can be 
justly pleaded as a precedent to war- 



rant It. Those who were thus 



pur- 



chased,' and held in this servile rela- 
tion, were generally those of their own 
nation, who from being reduced to a 
state of poverty, had sold their own 
services, or those whose services had 
become forfeited by a breach of the 
laws, or lastly, those who were obtained 
from the surrounding heathen in the 
manner which will be considered in the 
Notes on Lev. 25. It is certain, how- 
ever, that from whatever source they 
were obtained, they were treated like 
the rest of the family to which they 
belonged, and had privileges entirely 
unknown to modern servitude. See 

Note on Gen. 15. 3. -IT He that is 

born in his house. The children of his 
slave. 

12, 13. IfapriesVs daughter be mar- 
ried to a stranger. That is, to one 
who was not of the stock or family of 
the priests, in relation to whom other 
Israelites were counted as ^ strangers.' 
By marrying out of the priestly line 
she of course lost the right which she 
had to her share of the Levitical main- 
tenance while she remained at home in 
her father's house. An exception to 
this rule is stated in the next verse, 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXII. 



229 



shall eat of her father's meat ; but 
there shall no stranger eat thereof. 

14 H t And if a man eat of the 
holy thing unwittingly, then he 
shall put the fifth part thereof unto 
it, and shall give it unto the priest, 
with the holy thing. 

15 And u they shall not profane 
the holy things of the children of 
Israel which they offer unto the 
Lord: 

16 Or suffer them x to bear the 
iniquity of trespass, when they eat 

t ch. 5. 15, 16. u Numb. 18. 32. x ver. 9. 

when a priest's daughter so married 
was left a widow, or had been divorced, 
without children. ]n this case, she was 
permitted to return and become a mem- 
ber of her father's family as before, and 
ate of his food, like the rest of his 
family. 

The case of one who ate of the Holy 
Things unwittingly. 

14:. If a man eat of the holy thing 
unwittingly. Heb. nl^^im hishgdgahj 
through unadvised error. Though the 
act were done ignorantly and uninten- 
tionally, yet in order to inspire the ut- 
most caution in respect to holy things, 
the priest was to afS.x a value to the 
thing eaten, which the offender was 
obliged to pay, together with a fifth 
part of the value in addition : all which 
went to the priest. 

15, 16. They shall not 'profane^ &c. 
That is, the priests should not profane 
the holy thhigs by suffering them to be 
eaten by strangers. The phrase in the 
next verse, ' suffer them to bear the ini- 
quity,' may be rendered ^ cause them to 
bear,' meaning that they shall not by 
their negligence cause the people to fall 
under the punishment which God would 
inflict for such a trespass. Otherwise 
it may be understood of the priests 
themselves, which appears to be inti- 
mated by the marginal reading, ^ lade 
themselves with the iniquity of trespass 
m their eatingr .' This is favored by the 
20 



their holy things : for I the Lord 
do sanctify them. 

17 IT And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

18 Speak unto Aaron, and to his 
sons, and unto all the children of 
Israel, and say unto them, y What- 
soever he he of the house of Israel, 
or of the strangers in Israel, that 
will offer his oblation for all his 
vows, and for all his free-will-offer- 
ings, which they will offer unto 
the Lord for a burnt-offering : 

y ch. 1. 2, 3, 10. Numb. 15. 14. 



Gr. which has e-a^ovai scp' eavrovs avoixtav, 
bring upon them iniquity. But after 
all it is scarcely possible to determine 
whether the priests or the people are 
intended. 

Free-will and Thank-offerings for 
Vows to be without Blemish. 
18. Speak unto Aaron, and to his 
sons, and unto all the children of Israel. 
As the enactments that follow had re- 
spect to the quality of the sacrifices 
which were to be offered by the congre- 
gation, the congregation had, of course, 
as much concern in them as the priests, 
and therefore they are addressed to the 
whole people collectively. They con- 
stitute a strict injunction that all sacri- 
fices by way of present, or free-will 
offering to God, made either by Israelite 
or proselyte, for thanksgiving for former 
mercies, or by way of vow for procur- 
ing blessings desired, should be perfect 
in their kind. No beast that was mark- 
ed by any apparent defect, superfluity, 
excrescence, deformity, or disease, was 
permitted to come upon the altar. For 
the reason of this statute, see Note on 

Lev. 1., prefatory remarks. ^ Or of 

the strangers in Israel. Heb. I^in ^2 
min hagger, from the stranger, collect, 
sing. Gr. ruyv -irpoa-qKvrwv tojv TrpoaKCL- 
jisucou upug avTOVS cv Icxparj'X, of the pros- 
elytes joined unto them in Israel ; i. e. 
such of the surrounding heathen na- 
tions as had renounced idolatry and be- 



230 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



19 ^' Ye shall offer at your own 
will a male without blemish of the 
beeves, of the sheep, or of the goats. 

20 ^But whatsoever hath a blem- 
ish, that shall ye not offer: for it 
shall not be acceptable for you. 

21 And b whosoever offereth a 
sacrifice of peace-offerings unto the 
Lord c to accomplish his vow, or a 
free-will-offering in beeves, or 
sheep, it shall be perfect to be ac- 
cepted: there shall be no blemish 
therein. 

22 t^ Blind, or broken, or maimed, 
or having a wen, or scurvy, or scab- 

z ch. 1. 3. aDeut. 15. 21, and 17. 1. Mai. 
1. 8, 14. Eph. 6. 27, Heb. 9, 14. 1 Pet. 1. 
19. b ch. 3. 1, 6. c ch, 7. 16. Numb. 15. 
3, 8. Deut. 23. 21, 23. Ps. 61. 8, and 65. 
1. Eccles. 5. 4, 5. d ver. 20. Mai. 1. 8. 



come converts to the faith of Israel, but 
had not been circumcised. These were 
usually called proselytes of the gate, 
and differed entirely from the strangers 
alluded to, v. 25, as will be seen by the 
Note in loc. 

19. At your own icill. Rather, ac- 
cording to the Heb. ^ for your favorable 
acceptance.' See Note on Lev. 1. 3. 
Gr. 6eKTa, acceptable. Thus too, Sol. 
Jarchi, ' Bring the thing that is meet to 
make you acceptable before me, that it 
may be to your favorable acceptation.' 
So in the next verse, the leading word 
in the clause, ^ it shall not be acceptable 
for you,' is in the original precisely the 
same C^IS^ rdtzon). 

23. That hath any thing superfluous 
or lacking. That is, deformed by any 
peculiar elongation or contraction of its 

limbs, IT That may est thou off er for 

a free-will offering. The most obvi- 
ous construction of this passage is, that 
the two kinds of defect just mentioned, 
though they prevented the acceptance 
of an animal for a vow, did not for 
a free-will offering; which would seem 
to have been considered of less value. 
But the Hebrew writers understand by 
free-will offering, in this case, not an 
offering for sacrifice on the altar, v.'here 



bed, ye shall not offer these unto 
the Lord, nor make e an offering 
by fire of them upon the altar unto 
the Lord. 

23 Either a bullock, or a lamb 
that hath any thing f superfluous 
or lacking in his parts, that mayest 
thou offer for a free-will-oflfering ; 
but for a vow it shall not be ac- 
cepted. 

24 Ye shall not offer unto the 
Lord that which is bruised, or 
crushed, or broken, or cut ; neither 
shall ye make any offering thereof 
in your land. 

25 Neither gfrom a stranger's 
hand shall ye offer ^ the bread of 

e ch. 1. 9, 13, and 3. 3, 5. f ch. 21. 18. 
g Numb. 15. 15, 16. h ch. 21. 6, 17. 

a blemished beast under no circum- 
stances was allowed, but for the main- 
tenance of the priests, or for sacred 
uses in general ; as, for instance, to be 
sold for the reparation of the temple, 
&c. 

24. Ye shall not offer unto the Lord 
that which is bruised, or crushed, or 
broken, or cut. That is, castrated ; of 
which there were four modes, expressed 

by these four terms. IT Neither shall 

ye make any offering thereof in your 
land. Heb. MD'$T\ ^)i Dl^lS^Jj^:: beartze- 
kem lo iaasu, in your land ye shall not 
make or do (it). That is, as the He- 
brews understand it, ye shall not do this 
thing, ye shall not be in the practice of 
castrating your animals in any part of 
your land. Otherwise it may be under- 
stood as in our version, which is sustain- 
ed by the Greek. See Note on Deut. 23. 1. 

25. Neither from a stranger^s hand 
shall ye offer. Heb. ^IDD p "1^)2 
miyad ben nakdr, from the hand of the 
son of an alien. That is, a Gentile, a 
foreigner, one not of the seed of Israel. 
Gr. o\\oyevr]g^ of another stock. The 
Hebrew writers for the most part ex- 
pound this of blemished beasts, brought 
by Gentiles to be offered to the Lord, 
which was sometimes the case with 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXII. 



231 



your God of any of these ; because 
their i corruption 25 in them, an^ 
blemishes be in them : they shall 
not be accepted for you. 

26 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

27 k When a bullock, or a sheep, 
or a goat is brought forth, then it 
shall be seven days under the dam ; 
and from the eighth day and thence- 
forth it shall be accepted for an of- 
fering made by fire unto the Lord. 

28 And whether it be cow, or ewe, 
ye shall not kill it land her young 
both in one day. 

i Mai. 1. 14. k Exod. 22. 30. 1 Deut. 22. 6. 

those who were convinced of the folly 
of idolatry, and felt the prompting of a 
better service towards God. This is 
recognized by Maimonides : ' If the 
heathen (Gentile) bringeth peace-offer- 
ings, he offereth them for bm-nt-offerings, 
for the heathen's heart is towards 
heaven ;^ they are often prompted to 
worship. We see something of this 
kind in the case of Cyras, Ezra 6. 8-10. 
But though their sacrifices were allow- 
ed, yet the victims were required to be 
no less perfect than those of the Israel- 
ites. As they were to bring no blem- 
ished offering, so they were to take 
none such from the hand of a stranger. 
Such offerers were obliged to adhere to 
the rites of the country observed by the 
priests. Thus Alexander the Great, 
when he was at Jerusalem, offered sac- 
rifice to God according to the directions 
of the high priest. Josephus, Lib. 11., 
at the end. ^ Because their corrup- 
tion is in them. That is, their faults 
are in them, the faults above mentioned ; 
which might as a general rule be pre- 
sumed, coming from the source they 
did. It would be natural that the ideas 
of the heathen on these matters would 
be very loose. 

The Age at which different Animals 
were to be offered to God. 
27. It shall be seven days under the 



29 And when ye will m offer a 
sacrifice of thanksgiving unto the 
Lord, offer it at your own will. 

30 On the same day it shall be 
eaten up, ye shall leave n none of it 
until the morrow : I am the Lord. 

31 o Therefore shall ye keep my 
commandments, and do them : I 
am the Lord. 

32 p Neither shall ye profane my 
holy name; but q I will be hallowed 
among the children of Israel : I 
am the Lord which r hallow you, 

m ch. 7. 12. Ps. 107. 22, and 116. 17. Amos 
4. 5. n ch. 7. 15. o ch. 19. 37. Numb. 15. 40. 
Deut. 4, 40. P ch. 18. 21. q ch. 10. 3. 
Matt. 6. 9. Luke 11. 2. r ch. 20. 8. 

dam. Before the eighth day they were 
not fit for food, and therefore not for 
sacrifice, which was the bread or food 
of God, as it is frequently termed. See 
Note on Ex. 22. 30. 

28. Ye shall not kill it and her young 
both in one day. This precept seems 
to be confined to sacrifices, which were 
to be devoid of all appearance of cruelty. 
The Jews in general understand it as 
inculcating mercy. Maimonides ex- 
pressly remarks, that it was designed 
to prevent the slaughter of the young 
' in the presence of the dam, because 
this occasions to animals extreme grief; 
nor is there, in this respect, a difference 
between the distress of man and that of 
the irrational creation.' The Targum 
of Jonathan beautifully introduces the 
verse with this paraphrase : — ' And my 
people, the children of Israel, as our 
Father is merciful in heaven, so be ye 
merciful on earth.' 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

THE JEWISH FESTIVALS. 

The present chapter partakes in great 
measure of the character of the nine- 
teenth, containing a republication of 
certain laws. The inspired historian 
having previously given full details of 
the statutes relative to holy persons^ 
holy things y and holy places -^wgw enters 



232 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



33 s That brought you out of the 

s Ex. 6. 7. ch. 11. 45, and 19. 36, and 25. 
33. Numb. 15. 41. 

upon the consideration of holy times. 
The laws relative to the annual fast, 
the feast of trumpets, and the three 
great annual festivals, are here all 
brought together in one view, in their 
chronological order, along with the law 
of the Sabbath; and additions to the 
ceremonies, as before prescribed, are 
interspersed. These festivals consti- 
tuted a very peculiar feature of the 
Hebrew polity. Their influence, in- 
volving as they did the meeting of the 
mass of the male population in one 
place three times every year, cannot be 
too highly estimated. The journey 
itself, taking place at the finest season 
of the year, would naturally be deemed 
rather a recreative excursion than a 
hardship, in a country so small as that 
which the Hebrews were destined to 
occupy. One grand design of these 
re-unions appears to have been to coun- 
teract the dividing tendency of the sepa- 
ration into clans or tribes. By being 
thus brought into contact on an equal 
footing, they were reminded of their 
common origin, and of their common 
objects. The fact was brought home 
vividly to their thoughts that they were 
the sons of the same father, worship- 
pers of the same God, and heirs of the 
same promises. The beginnings also 
of idolatry were likely to be checked 
by the frequent renewal of these acts 
of worship and homage. Persons of 
distant towns and difierent tribes met 
together on terms of brotherhood and 
fellowship; and old relations were re- 
newed, and new ones formed. 

Several sections are devoted by Mi- 
chaelis to the statement of the political 
and other advantages resulting from 
these festivals. Among other conside- 
rations, he observes, that if any of the 
tribes happened to be jealous of each 
other, or, as was sometimes the case, 
involved in civil war, still their meet- 



land of Egypt, to be your God : I 
am the Lord. 



ing together in one place for the purpos- 
es of religion and sociality, had a ten- 
dency to prevent their being completely 
alienated, and forming themselves into 
two or more unconnected states ; and 
even though this had at any time hap- 
pened, it gave them an opportunity of 
again cementing their differences, and 
re-uniting. This is so correctly true, 
that the separation of the ten tribes 
from the tribe of Judah, under Pveho- 
boam and Jeroboam, could never have 
been permanent, had not the latter ab- 
rogated one part of the Law of Moses 
relative to festivals. 

Another effect of these meetings re- 
garded the internal commerce of the 
Israelites. From the annual conven- 
tions of the whole people of any country 
for religious purposes, there generally 
arise, without any direct intention on 
their part, annual fairs, and internal 
commerce. Such festivals have always 
been attended with this effect. The 
famous old fair near Hebron arose from 
the congregation of pilgrims to the ter- 
ebinth-tree of Abraham. The yearly 
fairs among the Germans had a similar 
origin. Among the Mohammedans 
similar festivals have always had the 
same results. Witness the annual pil- 
grimage to Mecca, which, in spite of 
many adverse circumstances, has given 
birth to one of the greatest markets in 
the world. Now the very same effects 
and to a still higher degree, must, even 
without any intention on the part of the 
legislator, have resulted from the high 
festivals of the Hebrews, to which the 
whole people were bound to assemble ; 
and more particularly as far as regards 
internal trade. Let us only figure to 
ourselves what would necessarily fol- 
low from such festivals being establish- 
ed. Every man would bring along with 
him every portable article which he 
could spare, and which he wished to turn 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIIL 



233 



CHAPTER XXni. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2 Speak uiito the children of Is- 
rael, and say unro them, Concern- 
ing a the feasts of the Lord, which 

a ver. 4. 37. 

into money ; and as several individuals 
would go from the same place, they 
would contrive various expedients to 
render their goods portable ; and this 
would be the more readily suggested 
by the habit of taking things, some of 
ihem needing carriage, to Jerusalem, as 
dues and offerings. Nor are means of 
conveyance expensive in the East, as 
they consist not, as with us, of wagons 
and horses, but of asses and camels — 
beasts which are highly serviceable in 
promoting the internal traffic of Sj^ria 
and Arabia. There could never be any 
want of buyers, where the whole people 
were convened 5 and the wholesale mer- 
chants would soon find it for their ad- 
vantage to attend, and purchase the 
commodities offered for sale by private 
individuals, especially manufactured 
goods. Whoever wished to purchase 
any particular articles would await the 
festivals in order to have a choice j 
and this, too, would lead great mer- 
chants to attend with all manner of 
goods for sale, for which they could 
hope to find purchasers. However, 
therefore. Moses may have desired to 
discourage the Israelites from engaging 
in foreign commerce, his measures were, 
in this instance at least, and whether 
intended or not, highly favorable to the 
internal intercourse and traffic of the 
country. 

For a more extended view of the 
happy effects, political, social, and eco- 
nomical, of these festivals, see Mi- 
chaelis ' Comment, on Laws of Moses, 
vol. III. § 197-201. 

General Introduction. 
2. Concerning the feasts of the Lord. 
Heb. niri*^ "^^^112 moed'e Yehovah, (as 
20* 



ye shall ^ proclaim to be holy con- 
vocations, even these are my feasts. 
3 c Six days shall work be done ; 
but the seventh day is the sabbath 
of rest, an holy convocation : ye 

b Exod. 32. 5. 2 Kings 10. 20. Ps. 81. .3. 
c Exod. 20. 9, and 23. 12, and 31. 15, and 34. 
21. ch. 19. 3. Deut. 5. 13. Luke 13. 14. 

to) the feasts of Jehovah. The original 
word *1'$^J2 moed, from ^IP'i ydad, to 
fix by appointment, literally implies 
merely a set tune, a stated season, for 
any purpose whatever, but is applied 
here and often elsewhere to the solemn 
feasts of the Israelites, which were ap- 
pointed by God, and fixed to certain 
seasons of the year. It is sometimes 
rendered in the Gr. by eoprr]^ a feast, and 
som.etimes by -avrjyvpig, a general as- 
sembly, of which the former occurs. Col. 
2. 16, ^ Let no man judge you in meat, 
or in drink, or in respect of an holy day 
{e^prr}), or of the new moon, or of the 
sabbath-days ;' and the other Heb. 12. 23, 

' But ye are come to the general 

assembly (-avnyvpts) and church of the 
first-born.' Perhaps a more suitable 
rendering of the term would be ' solem- 
nities.' IT Which ye shall proclaim 

to be holy convocations. The Hebrew 
may be rendered more literally, ' which 
ye shall call (as) callings of holiness ;' 
i. e. assemblages of the people which 
should be convened for holy or sacred 
purposes at set times by public procla- 
mation, and generally by the sound of 

a trumpet. Num. 10. S-10. H These 

are my feasts. Or, my assemblies, ap- 
pointed in honor of my name, and to be 
observed in obedience to my command ; 
viz. the sabbath, the passover, pente- 
cost, the beginning of the new year, the 
day of atonement, and the feast of tab- 
ernacles ; all which are embraced under 
the general name n5>1?2 mo'cd, and none 
besides. 

The Sabbath. 
3. Six days shall work be done ; but 
the seventh day is a sabbath of rest, &c. 
Heb. y]r:21D trQ.12 shabbath shabbathon^ 



234 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. a 1490. 



shall do no work therein , it is the 
sabbath of the Lord in all your 
dwellings. 

4 H <i These are the feasts of the 
Lord, even holy convocations, 
which ye shall proclaim in their 
seasons. 

5 e 111 the fourteenth day of the 
first month at even is the Lord's 
passover. 

<1 ver. 2. 37. Exod. 23. 14. e Exod. 12. 6, 
14, 18, and 13. 3, 10, and 23. 15, and 34. 18. 
Numb. 0. 2, 3, and 28. 16, 17. Deut. 16. 1-8. 
Josh. 5. 10. 

a sabbath of sabbatisin ; a highly em- 
phatic phrase denoting the greatest de- 
gree of consecration to purposes of rest. 
Although the main scope of the chap- 
ter has relation to other sacred seasons, 
yet as the Sabbath was ever to be es- 
teemed the grand solemnity, which was 
never to be supplanted or eclipsed by 
any other, therefore it is introduced here 
by way of preface to the others. See 
Note on Gen. 2. 3. % An holy convo- 
cation. That is, a time of holy convo- 
cation ] from which it appears that 
meetings for public worship are an es- 
sential part of the due observance of 
the day, and that they cannot be ne- 
glected or omitted without going con- 
trary to one main design of the insti- 
tution. IT Ye shall do no work there- 
in. On other holy days they were 
forbidden to do any servile work, v. 7, 
but on the sabbath, and the day of atone- 
ment, (which is also called a sabbath,) 
they were to do no work at aZZ, not even 

the dressing of meat. ^ In all your 

dwellings. Heb. tD^D^r^ViD^D JlDD bekol 
meshubothekem, in all your dwelling- 
places ; by which is meant not so much 
in their private habitations as in the va- 
rious places of their residence over the 
country. Gr. tv Trao-rj KaroiKia Vjjicjv^ 
in all your inhabiting, i. e. in every 
place that you may inhabit. The great 
feasts were to be kept in one place 
where the sanctuary was established ; 
but the sabbaths in this respect differed 
fiom them. They were to be observed 



6 And on the fifteenth day of the 
same month is the feast of unleav- 
ened bread unto the Lord: seven 
days ye must eat unleavened bread. 

7 fin the first day ye shall have 
an holy convocation : ye shall do 
no servile work therein. 

8 But ye shall offer an offering 
made by fire unto the Lord seven 
days ; in the seventh day is an holy <- 
convocation, ye shall do no servile ||| 
work therein. 

f Exod. 12. 16. Numb. 23. 18. 25. 

all over the land wherever they dwelt, 
particularly in the synagogues in every 
city, Acts 15, 21. 

1. The Passover. 

5-8. On the fourteenth day of the 
first month at even is the Lord''s Pass* 
over. Although moons, which began 
with the new moon, cannot, with per- 
fect accuracy, be accommodated to our 
months, the first month of the Hebrew 
year must always have fallen within 
the month of April. 

The Passover, it is well known, was 
kept in remembrance of the exodus 
from Egypt. The etymology of the 
term, and the occasion and circum- 
stances of the institution have already 
been dwelt upon in our Notes on Ex. 
12. We shall consequently be spared 
the necessity of any thing more than a 
general sketch of the observance of this 
feast. On the eve of the 14th day of 
the month (Abib or Nisan) all leaven 
was removed from their dwellings, so 
that nothing might be seen of it during 
the week ; a circumstance respecting 
which the Jews are very scrupulous 
even at this day. Previously to the 
commencement of the feast, on the tenth, 
the master of a family set apart a ram 
or a goat of a year old, usually the for- 
mer, which he slew on the fourteenth, 
^ between the two evenings,' before the 
altar j but in Egypt, where the event 
occurred which the Passover celebrat- j 

ed, the blood was sprinkled on the post I 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIII. 



235 



9 If And the Lokd spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

10 Speak unto the children of Is- 

of the door. The ram or kid was roast- 
ed whole, with two spits thrust through 
it, the one lengthwise, the other trans- 
versely, crossing the longitudinal one 
near the fore legs, so that the animal 
was, in a manner, crucified. The oven 
in which it was roasted was the circular 
pit in the floor [ground], which is still 
commonly used in the East. The re- 
striction that it was to be roasted, not 
boiled or eaten raw, is thought to be 
levelled at some idolatrous forms of 
sacrifice-feasting. Thus roasted, the 
Paschal Lamb was served up with a 
salad of wild and bitter herbs, and with 
the flesh of other sacrifices (peace- 
offerings), which are mentioned in 
Deut. 16. 2-6. Not fewer than ten, nor 
more than twenty persons were admit- 
ted to these sacred feasts, which were, 
at first, eaten in Egypt with loins girt 
about, with sandals on the feet, and 
with all the preparations for an imme- 
diate journey. But this does not ap- 
pear to have been the case at any sub- 
sequent period. The command, how- 
ever, not to break a bone of the offering, 
which was given in consequence of the 
people going in such haste (as they 
might otherwise have been delayed), 
was ever after observed among the Jews. 
In later times the celebration became 
encumbered with a number of involved 
ceremonies, very different from the sim- 
plicity and haste of the original institu- 
tion. As these derive no authority from 
the law, we shall only state such of 
them as serve to illustrate the account 
of that celebration of the Passover by 
Jesus Christ, w^hich to the Christian is 
not less interesting than the original in- 
stitution was to the Jew. The master 
of the family, after the Paschal supper 
was prepared, broke the bread, having 
first blessed it, and distributed it to all 
who were seated around him, so that 
each one might receive a part ; and 



rael, and say unto them, gWhen 

S Exod. 23. 16. 19, and 34. 22, 26. Numb. 
15. 2, 18, and 28. 26. Deut. 16. 9. Josh. 
3. 15. 

each was at liberty to dip it, before eat- 
ing, into a vessel of sauce. There were 
four cups of wine ordinarily drank at 
this supper, two before and two after 
meat. With the second, the two first 
hymns of what was called the lesser 
Ha//e/, being Psalms 113. and 114., were 
sung or chanted. The third cup, being 
the first after supper, was called the 
cup of blessing, because over it they 
blessed God, or said grace after meat. 
This was followed by a fourth and last 
cup, over v^hich they completed the 
hymn of praise, formed by the remain- 
der of the lesser Hallel, and thus the 
feast concluded. But it is said that a 
fifth cup of wine might be drunk by 
those who wished to repeat the great 
Hallel, which is generally understood 
to be Psalm 136. The wine was red, 
mixed with water. 

The Passover was immediately fol- 
lowed by the Feast of Unleavened 
Bread, which lasted seven days, so that 
the two together seemed to make one 
feast of eight days, and were, in fact, 
popularly so considered, the names be- 
ing often interchanged, so that the Pass- 
over day was sometimes considered as 
the first day of the feast of unleavened 
bread, and, on the other hand, the whole 
was often called the Passover Feast. 
The first and last days of these seven, 
were to be kept as Sabbaths, save that 
only servile labor Vv^as interdicted, 
which allowed food to be cooked. But 
no suspension of labor was required on 
the intermediate five days, which were 
distinguished chiefly by the abstinence 
from leavened bread, and by the unusual 
number of offerings at the tabernacle or 
temple, and of sacrifices for sin. The 
sixteenth of Abib, or the second day of 
Unleavened Bread, v/as distinguished 
by the offering of a barley sheaf, as 
an introduction to the barley-harvest, 
which was ripe about this time, accom 



236 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490* 



ye be come into the land which I 
give unto you, and shall reap the 
harvest thereof, then ye shall bring 
a sheaf of ii the first-fruits of your 
harvest unto the priest: 

11 And he shall i wave the sheaf 
before the Lord, to be accepted for 
you : on the morrow after the sab- 
bath the priest shall wave it. 

12 And ye shall offer that day 
when ye wave the sheaf, an he- 
lamb without blemish of the first 
year for a burnt-offering unto the 
Lord. 

13 kAnd the meat-offering there- 
of shall be two tenth-deals of fine 
flour mingled with oil, an offering 

b Rom. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 15. 20. Jam. 1. 18. 
Rev. 14. 4. i Exod. 29. 24. k ch. 2. 14-16. 

panied by a particular sacrifice, de- 
scribed in v. 9-14. 

The Sheaf of First Fruits. 

10. When ye he come into the land, 
&c. The actual observance of this law 
was to be deferred till they had arrived 
in the land of Canaan, and had become 
pernianently fixed in their settlements j 
for during their sojourn in the wilder- 
ness they could neither sow nor reap. 

TT Ye shall bring a sheaf of the 

first fruits. A sheaf of the new corn 
was brought to the priest who was to 
heave it up, in token of his presenting 
it to the God of heaven, and to wave it 
to and fro before the Lord, as the Lord 
of the whole earth, and the bountiful 
giver of all its fruits and favors. This 
offering of the sheaf of the first fruits 
did as it were sanctify to him all the 
rest of the harvest. Besides, it served 
as a type of Christ, who, as risen from 
the dead, is the ' first fruits of them that 
slept.' 1 Cor. 15. 20. 

14. Ye shall eat neither bread, &c. 
This is a precept which would naturally 
commend itself to the better feelings 
of every pious and reflecting mind. 
Nothing could be more appropriate than 
thus to testify a grateful sense of the 



made by fire unto the Lord for a 
sweet savour: and the drink-offer- 
ing thereof shall be of wine, the 
fourth part of an bin. 

14 And ye shall eat neither bread, 
nor parched corn, nor green ears, 
until the self-same day that ye 
have brought an offering unto your 
God : tt shall be a statute for ever 
throughout your generations in all 
your dwellings. 

15 H And lye shall count unto 
you from the morrow after the 
sabbath, from the day that ye J 
brought the sheaf of the wave-of- " 
fering; seven sabbaths shall be 
complete : 

I ch. 25. 8. Exod. 34. 22. Deut, 16. 9. 



source from whence the crowning bless- 
ings of life proceeded. As God was the 
bountiful donor of the blessings of the 
harvest, it was an ordinance which 
would find a response in every right 
heart, that he should first be honored 
with its fruits before his creatures should 
have appropriated anj^ part of them to 
their own use. This universal dictate 
of a grateful bosom found a fitting ex- 
pression in the customs of the ancient 
Romans, of whom Pliny says, ' Ne gus- 
tabant quidem novas fruges, aut vina, 
antequam sacerdotes primitias libas- 
sent,' they did not so much as taste of 
their corn or wine, till the priests had 
offered the first fruits. 

2. Feast of Pentecost. 

15. Ye shall count unto you, &c. 
From the day of waving the sheaf they 
were to count seven sabbaths or weeks 
complete, or forty-nine days, and then 
was to be celebrated the second or great 
harvest-festival, called Pentecost, from 
the Gr. TrevniKouTr], fifty, from its begin- 
ning yi/^i/ days after the waving of the 
sheaf of the first fruits. 

The Feast of Pentecost, here insti- 
tuted, is called by various names in the 
sacred writings, as * the feast of weeks,' 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIII. 



237 



16 Even unto the morrow after 
the seventh sabbath shall ye num- 
ber m fifty (Jays ; and ye shall offer 
»a new meat-offering unto the 
Lord. 

17 Ye shall bring out of your 
habitations two wave-loaves of two 
tenth-deals: they shall be of fine 
flour, they shall be baken with 
leaven, they are ©the first-fruits 
unto the Lord. 

18 And ye shall offer with the 
bread seven lambs without blemish 
of the first year, and one young 
bullock, and two rams : they shall 
be for a burnt-offering unto the 
Lord, with their meat-offering, 

m Acts 2. 1. n Numb. 2S. 26. o Exod. 23. 

16, 19, and 22. 29, and 34. 22, 26. Numb. 15. 

17, and 28. 26. Deut. 26. 1. 

Ex. 34.22 ; Deut. 16. 10, 16, because of 
its being celebrated a week of weeks, 
or seven-weeks, after the feast of un- 
leavened bread ; the ' feast of harvest,' 
Ex. 23. 16 ; and also the ' day of first 
fruits,' Num. 16. 26 ; for this was pro- 
perly the harvest-festival at which the 
Israelites were to offer thanksgivings 
to God for the bounties of the harvest, 
and to present to him the first fruits 
thereof in bread baked of the new corn. 
It seems, in fact, that the barley har- 
vest commenced about the Passover, 
and the wheat harvest ended at the 
Pentecost in Palestine, where, as in 
Egypt, the barley is ripe considerably 
earlier than the wheat. This festival 
lasted for seven days, during which 
many holocausts and offerings for sin 
were sacrificed. In later times many 
Jews from foreign countries came to 
Jerusalem on this joyful occasion. 
Even at that time, and still more since 
then, a greater degree of relative im- 
portance seems to have been attached 
to this festival than appears to have 
been designed by the law. It was dis- 
covered that the date, fifty days after 
the Passover, coincided with the deliv- 
ery of the law from Mount Sinai, 



and their drink-offerings, even an 
offering made by fire of sweet sa- 
vour unto the LoPwD. 

19 Then ye shall sacrifice pone 
kid of the goats for a sin-offering, 
and two lambs of the first year for 
a sacrifice of q peace-offerings. 

20 And the priest shall wave them 
with the bread of the first-fruits 
for a wave-offering before the 
Lord, with the two lambs : r they 
shall be holy to the Lord for the 
priest. 

21 And ye shall proclaim on the 
self-same day, that it may be an 
holy convocation unto you : ye 
shall do no servile work therein : 
it shall be a statute for ever in all 

P ch. 4. 23, 23. Numb. 28. 30. q ch. 3. 1. 
r Numb. 18. 12. Deut. 18. 4. 



which was fifty days after the depart- 
ure from Egypt, and consequently after 
the first Passover. Hence, by degrees, 
instead of resting on the ground on 
v/hich Moses placed it, the festival was 
turned into a commemoration of that 
great event. 

17. Ye shall bring out of your hahita- 
ations. That is, not out of their houses, 
but out of some one or more of the 
several places or regions where they 
abode, as explained above, in the Note 
on V. 3. It cannot be supposed to mean 
that each locality where Israelites re- 
sided furnished two wave loaves, for 
there were to be but two for the whole 
nation ; but the leading idea is, that the 
flour was to be supplied from some 
place in the country, and was then of- 
fered in the name of the whole congre- 
gation, together with the seven lambs, 
the young bullock, the two rams, the 
kid, and the two lambs ; all which were 
no doubt furnished at the common 
charges of the whole people. As the 
loaves were not to be burnt on the altar, 
they v/ere allov/ed to be made of leaven, 
■without contradicting ch. 2. 11, 12. 

21. Ye shall do no servile work there- 
in. This the Jev/s understood of every 



238 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



your dwellings throughout your 
generations. 
22 H And s when ye reap the 
harvest of your land, thou shalt 
not make clean riddance of the 
corners of thy field when thou 
reapest, t neither shalt thou gather 
any gleaning of thy harvest : thou 
shalt leave them unto the poor, 

s ch. 19. 9. t Deut. 24. 19. 

kind of labor except that which per- 
tained to the preparation of food. It 
properly denotes that more laborious 
kind of service which we understand by 
drudgery J such as ploughing, sowing, 
reaping, threshing, gathering the vint- 
age, &c. 

22. When ye reap the harvest, &c. 
See Note on Lev. 19. 9. Comp. Deut. 
24. 19. 

3. The Feast of Trumpets. 
24. A memorial of blowing of trum- 
pets. Heb. ns^l^n ^1'i::t zikron te- 
rudhy which the Chal. renders a memo- 
rial of shouting. As the word in the 
original for memorial has the sense of 
celebrating or covimemorating with 
praise, the import of the language un- 
doubtedly is, ' A festival for commem- 
orating or praising God with the sound 
of trumpets.' It was observed with 
great solemnity, the trumpets sounding 
from sun-rise to sun-set. The priest 
who sounded the first trumpet, began 
with the usual prayer, ' Blessed be God 
who hath sanctified us by his precepts,' 
&c., subjoining, ' Blessed be God who 
hath hitherto preserved us in life, and 
brought us unto this time.' After this 
the people repeated with a loud voice 
the following words from Ps. 88. 15: 
' Blessed is the people who know the 
joyful sound,' &c. As the feast of new 
moons was the sanctifying of each 
month, so the feast of trumpets was the 
sanctifying of each year, and a remind- 
ing of the Israelites that all their times 
were in God's hand. How rational and 



and to the stranger : I am the Lord 
your God. 

23 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

24 Speak unto the children of Is- 
rael, saying, In the « seventh month, 
in the first day of the month, shall 
ye have a sabbath, x a memorial of 
blowing of trumpets, an holy con- 
vocation. 

u Numb. 29. 1. x ch. 25. 9. 



dignified was this conduct throughout 
the land of Judea, when compared with 
the general practice of other nations ! 
For, instead of making the new year a 
day of devotion, it is commonly a day 
of idleness and dissipation. At the 
present day, as we are told by Calmet, 
Leo of Modena, Buxtorf, and Basnage, 
the Jews are accustomed on this even- 
ing to wish one another a good year, to 
make better cheer than ordinary, and 
to sound the trumpet thirty times suc- 
cessively. During this feast, which 
lasts, it seems, the first two days of the 
year, business is suspended, and they 
hold, by tradition, that on this day God 
particularly judges the actions of the 
foregoing year, and disposes the events 
of the year following. Wherefore, on 
the first days of the foregoing month, or 
eight days at least before the feast of 
trumpets, they generally apply them- 
selves to works of penitence, and the 
evening before the feast many of them 
receive 39 lashes by way of discipline. 
On the first evening of the year, and 
which precedes the first day of Tizri 
(for their evening precedes their morn- 
ing,) as they return from the synagogue 
they say to one another, ' May you be 
written in a good year ;' to which the 
other answers, ^And you also.' On 
their return home, they serve up at ta- 
ble honey and unleavened bread, and 
whatever may signify a plentiful and 
happy year. Some of them, on the 
morning of these two feasts, go to the 
synagogue clothed in white, in token of 
purity and penitence. Among the Ger- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIIL 



239 



25 Ye shall do no servile work 
therein ; but ye shall oflfer aa offer- 
ing made by tire unto the Lord. 

26 H And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

21 y Also on the tenth day of this 
seventh month there shall 6e a day 
of atonement ; it shall be an holy 

y ch. 16. 30. Numb. 29. 7. 

man Jews, some wear the habit which 
they have appointed for their burial, 
and this is done as a mortification. 

On this day they repeat in the syna- 
gogues several appropriate prayers and 
benedictions. They take the Penta- 
teuch very solemnly from its chest, and 
call upon five persons to read the por- 
tion which describes the sacrifice that 
was appointed for that day ; then they 
twenty times sound a horn, sometimes 
very slowly, and at other times quickly, 
to remind them, as they explain it, of 
the judgments of God, to intimidate 
sinners, and induce them to repent. 
After prayers they return to their 
houses, to take some refreshment, and 
spend the rest of the day in hearing ser- 
mons, and in other exercises of devo- 
tion. The two days of the feast being 
observed exactly in the same manner, a 
more particular description of the lat- 
ter woUid be unnecessary. It may, 
however, be remarked, with respect to 
their preparation for the feast, that 
many of the Jews plunge themselves in 
cold water, confessing, as they descend 
into it, their numerous sins, and beating 
their breasts ; and they plunge them- 
selves over the head, that they may 
appear entirely clean before God, for 
they think that, on this day, God as- 
sembles his council, or his angels, and 
that he opens his book to judge all men. 
Three sorts of books, they imagine, are 
opened ; viz. the book of life for the 
just ; the book of death for the wicked ; 
and the book of a middle state, for such 
as are neither very good nor very bad. 
In the two books of life and death they 
conceive there are two kinds of pages. 



convocation unto you, and ye shall 
afflict your souls, and offer an offer- 
ing made by fire unto the Lord. 

2S And ye shall do no work in 
that same day ; for it is a day of 
atonement to make an atonement 
for you before the Lord your God. 

29 For whatsoever soul it be that 
shall not be afflicted in that same 



one for this life, and the other for the 
next ; for it often happens that the 
wicked are not punished in this life 
according to their demerits, whereas 
the just sufier severely, as if they had 
incurred the displeasure of God. This 
conduct of the Almighty is the reason 
why no one can be sure of his state, 
but is uncertain whether he be worthy 
to be loved or hated. With respect to 
the middle class, they think that they 
are not written down any where, for 
God delays it till the day of annual ex- 
piation, which is the tenth day after, 
to see if they will reform ,* and then 
their sentence is fixed either for life or 
death. Such are the ceremonies with 
which the modern Jews are said to ob- 
serve the feast of trumpets j but it 
should ever be recollected, that these 
ceremonies are far from being universal ; 
for in countries where superstition pre- 
vails, they insensibly become tinctured 
with it, and in countries where a more 
rational mode of thinking is general, 
they as naturally adopt a more rational 
ritual. 

4. The Bay of Atonement. 
27-32. On the tenth day of this sev- 
enth month, there shall be a day of 
atonement. This was properly an an- 
nual fast, and the only one prescribed 
by the law, however fasts may abound 
in the present calendar of the Jews. It 
occurred on the fifth day before the 
Feast of Tabernacles, or on the tenth 
of the seventh month, Tisri (October). 
On this day they were to abstain from 
all servile work, to take no food ' from 
evening to evening/ during which they 



240 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



day, 2 he shall be cut off from 
among his people. 

30 And whatsoever soul it be that 
doeth any work in that same day, 
a the same soul will I destroy from 
among his people. 

31 Ye shall do no manner of 
work : it shall he a statute for ever 
throughout your generations in all 
your dwellings. 

32 It shall be unto you a sabbath 
of rest, and ye shall afflict your 

z Gen. 17. 14. a ch. 20, 3, 5, 6. 

were to ' afflict their souls.' The sa- 
crificial services of this day were the 
most solemn in all the year, but as we 
have more fully considered the details 
of the festival in our Notes on the 16th 
chapter, it will be unnecessary to re- 
peat them here. 

5. The Feast of Tabernacles. 

34. The fifteenth day of the seventh 
month shall be the feast of tabernacles. 
This festival is termed in Hebrew !in 
Sni^Dfl ^hag hassukoth, feast of tents, 
or booths^hui by the Chal. is called ^ the 
shade of clouds,' in allusion to the sha- 
dow of the divine protection in the pil- 
lar of cloud that attended the Israelites 
in their journey through the wilderness. 

The Feast of Tabernacles was insti- 
tuted in memory of the journey through 
the Arabian wilderness, and therefore 
the people, during its continuance, 
dwelt in booths. This lasted seven 
days, from the 15th to the 22d of the 
seventh month, Tisri (October). It 
is usual to state that another object of 
this feast was as a Feast of In-gather- 
ing, to return thanks, and to rejoice for 
the completed vintage and gathering in 
of the fruits. But a close examination 
will make it probable that this was the 
separate object of the eighth day, 
which was added to the seven : for it 
was only during the seven days that the 
people were to dwell in booths. Being 
thus closely connected, they got to be 
regarded as one festival, and the names 



souls : in the ninth day of the month 
at even, from even unto even, shall 
ye celebrate your sabbath. 

33 1[ And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

34 Speak unto the children of 
Israel, saying, ^ The fifteenth day 
of this seventh month shall be the 
feast of tabernacles /or seven days 
unto the Lord. 



b Exod. 23. 16. Numb. 29. 12. Deut. 16. 
13. Ezra 3. 4. Neh. S. 14. Zech. 14. 16. 
John 7. 2. 



were confounded and interchanged, as || 
in the analogous case of the Passover 
and Feast of Unleavened Bread. In- 
stead, therefore, of regarding this as 
one festival of eight days, wath two 
names and two objects, it seems best to 
regard it as a union of two festivals 
with different names and objects, the 
one of seven days, and the other of one 
day. 

As in the other festivals of a week's 
duration, the first and last days were to 
be observed as Sabbaths, with the ex- 
ception that only servile labor was m- 
terdicted. On the other five days any 
kind of work might be executed. Dur- 
ing all the seven the people were to live 
in booths made of branches of several 
sorts of trees, which, as mentioned in 
Lev. 23. 40, are the palm, the willow, 
and two others, which seem to denote 
' beautiful trees,' and any ' thick or 
bushy wood,' rather than any particu- 
lar species. Those named in Nehem. 
8. 15, are different, and it seems reason- 
able to conclude that it Avas not the 
intention of the law to compel the use 
of any particular species, but only such 
as were suitable for the purpose and 
could be easily procured. It is not ex- 
pressly said in the law that the booths 
were to be made with those branches, 
though the language of the text with 
the context, obviously leads to that con- 
clusion. It was so understood in the 
time of Nehemiah. But the Sadducees 
and Pharisees, in later days, spUt on 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIII. 



241 



35 On the first day shall be a holy 
convocation : ye shall do no servile 
work therein. 

36 Seven days ye shall offer an 
offering made by fire unto the 
Lord; con the eighth day shall 
be a holy convocation unto you, 
and ye shall offer an offering made 
by fire unto the Lord: it is a d sol- 
emn assembly ; and ye shall do no 
servile work therein, 

c Numb. 29. 35. Neh. 8. 13. John 7. 37. 
d Deut. 16. S. 2 Chrou. 7. 9. Neh. 8. IS. 
Joel. 1. 14, and 2. 15. 

this point ; the former understanding 
that the booths were to be made of 
the boughs, while the latter contended 
that they were to be borne rejoicingly 
in the hands. The latter practice pre- 
vailed in the time of Christ, as it does 
to this day. The Karaites, however, 
follow the interpretation of the Saddu- 
cees, which seems to be the right one, 
although it must be confessed that the 
Israelites did not, in the Arabian wil- 
derness dwell in green booths, but in 
tents. It seems that the people often 
made their booths on the flat roofs of 
their houses. More public sacrifies 
were to be offered on this festival than 
on any of the others, as may be seen in 
Num. 29. 12-39. This feast was cele- 
brated with more of outward glee than 
any others, though v/ithout intemper- 
ance, to which the Hebrews as a nation, 
do not appear to have been ever much 
addicted. The ceremonies of parading in 
procession with branches, chanting ho- 
sannas, and of drawing water from the 
pool of Siloam, to pour out, mixed with 
wine, on the sacri&ce as it lay on the 
altar, existed in the time of Christ, and 
• before ; but they rest rather upon tra- 
dition than upon any express law of 
Moses. The eighth day, which we re- 
gard as the proper Feast of In-gather- 
ing^ was kept as a Sabbath (and some- 
times must actually have been one) 
like the first of the tabernacle feasts. 
Notwithstanding its being a distinct 
festival, the sacrifices for it were less 

21 



37 e These are the feasts of the 
Lord, which ye shall proclaim to 
be holy convocations, to offer an 
offering made by fire unto the Lord, 
a burnt-offering, and a meat-offer- 
ing, a sacrifice, and drink-offerings, 
every thing upon his day : 

38 f Besides the sabbaths of the 
Lord, and besides your gifts, and 
besides all your vows, and besides 
all your free-will-offerings, which 
ye give unto the Lord. 

e ver. 2. 4. f Numb. 29. 39. 

than those of any of the preceding 
seven days. 

36. It is a solemn assembly. Heb. 
^in Ti^lSS? atzereth hi, rendered in the 
margin a day of restraint. This is a 
new term, which does not occur pre* 
viously in reference to any of the feasts 
here mentioned, and is of somewhat 
difiicult interpretation. As the verbal 
root 1125> citzar signifies to shut up, to 
close, Theodoret renders it to Ts\og tcdv 
£opTo}v,the conclusion of the feast. So 
also the Gr. of the lxx. has e^oSiovy 
outgoing, or close. The term is applied 
to the last or concluding day of the 
feast of unleavened bread, Deut. 16. 8, 
and Josephus remarks, that the feast of 
Pentecost, which was kept at the end 
of seven computed weeks, was called 
aaapOa, asartha, evidently from the Heb. 
original. This, therefore, as it was the 
last, so it was the great day of the feast, 
as it is termed by the Evangelist, John 
7. 37. From this it would seem that 
any great solemnity or assemblage is 
called by this name of iTi'^^S' atzerethj 
as 2 Kings 10. 20, Joel 1. 14 ; although 
Gesenius maintains that the noun de- 
rives the meaning of assemblage from 
that sense of the root which he renders 
to stay, restrain, constrain ; which is 
equivalent to the explication of the 
Jewish doctors, who make it as imply- 
ing restraint or detention, inasmuch as 
they were detained at Jerusalem one 
day longer than on any other festival, 
none of which lasted more than seven 



242 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



39 Also in the fifteenth day of the 
seventh month, when ye have 
g gathered in the fruit of the land, 
ye shall keep a feast unto the Lord 
seven days : on the first day shall 
be a sabbath, and on the eighth day 
shall he a sabbath. 

g Exod. 23. 16. Deut. 16. 13. 

days. It is one of the cases where the 
import of the original is unavoidably 
left doubtful. 

39. Also in the fifteenth day, &c. 
There is here no new injunction, but 
merely a reiteration and enforcement 
of what was said before. It is simply 
an amplification of the particulars of the 
feast of tabernacles. The particle ' also' 
therefore should be rendered * surely,' 
* truly,' or something equivalent. 

40. Ye shall take you on the first day 
the boughs of goodly trees. Heb. '^^iD 
"^in f ^ P^^^ '^^^ haddr, the fruit of 
the tree of goodliness, or honor ; im- 
plying probably that branches were 
taken with the fruit as well as the leaves 
upon them, wherever such could be 
conveniently obtained. Otherwise com- 
mon fruitless boughs were doubtless to 
be made use of. Their booths were a 
kind of arbors. Maimonides, the ora- 
cle of the Jews, following the Jerusalem 
Targum, contends that the citroji or 
pome-citron, is the particular tree whose 
loughs were taken on this occasion ; 
and so firm in this persuasion are even 
the modern Jews, that they fancy the 
feast cannot be duly celebrated without 
such branches. Numbers, therefore, of 
the German Jews send annually into 
Spain, to procure a quantity of branches 
with the citrons upon them ; and when 
the feast is over they distribute them 
as a gift of great value to their friends. 

IT Branches of palm-trees. These 

branches, as also the others mentioned 
in this connexion, the Sadducees under- 
stood to be for making their booths, but 
the Pharisees contend that they were to 
be carried in their hands ; which is the 
practice of the modern Jews to this day. 



40 And b ye shall take you on the 
first day the boughs of goodly trees, 
branches of palm-trees, and the 
boughs of thick trees, and willows 
of the brook ; i and ye shall rejoice 
before the Lord your God seven 
days. 

hNeh. S. 15. i Deut. 16. 14, 15. 

They tie together one branch of palm, 
three branches of myrtle, and one of 
willow. This they carry in their right 
hands, and in their left they have a 
branch of citron with its fruit, whenever 
they can procure it. With these they 
make a procession in their synagogues 
every day of the feast, that is, for seven 
days, around their reading desks, as 
their ancestors did around the walls of 
Jericho, in token of the expected down- 
fall of their enemies. While making 
this procession, they sing ' Hosannah,* 
whence the feast itself is sometimes 
called by the Rabbins ' the Hosannah j' 
and sometimes the branches are called d 
by the same name. On the last great " 
day, which they call ' Hosannah Rab- 
bah,' or ^ the great Hosannah,' they 
make the procession seven times toge- 
ther, in memory of the siege of Jericho. 
The form of the Hosannah in their rit- 
ualj which they sing on this occasion, 
is remarkable ; — 

For thy sake, our Creator, Hosannah. 
For thy sake, O our Redeemer, Hosannah. 
For thy sake, O our Seeker, Hosannah. 

This would seem to be a virtual calling 
upon the blessed Trinity to save them 
and send them help. 

Another distinguishing ceremony on 
this occasion was the pouring out of 
water, the manner of which was as fol- 
lows : — One of the priests, with a golden 
flagon, went to the pool of Siloam or 
Bethesda, where, filling it with water, 
he returned to the court of the priests 
by the gate on the south side of the 
court of Israel, thence called the Water 
Gate ; and no sooner did he appear, 
than the silver trumpets sounded to 



B. C. 1490.J 



CHAPTER XXIV. 



243 



41 t And ye shall keep it a feast 
unto the Lord seven days in the 
year : it shall he a statute for ever 
in your generations ; ye shall cele- 
brate it in the seventh month. 

42 lYe shall dwell in booths 
seven days ; all that are Israelites 
born shall dwell in booths : 

k Numb. 29 U. Neh. S. IS. 1 Neh. 8. 
14, 15, 16. 

announce his arrival. He continued to 
advance and went directly to the top of 
the altar, to the two basons that stood, 
the one with the wine for the ordinary 
drink-offering, the other for the water 
which he had brought ; where, pouring 
the water into the empty bason, he 
mixed the w4ne and water together, and 
afterwards poured out both together by 
way of libation. There is nothing said 
about this part of the ceremonies in the 
law of Moses, but the Jews pretend to 
find authority for it in Is. 12. 3, ^ With 
joy shall ye draw water out of the wells 
of salvation.' The conjecture of Pa- 
trick is far more probable, that it was 
in memory of the water which follow^ed 
them during all the time of their so- 
journing in the wilderness. It is sup- 
posed that our Savior alludes to this 
custom, where it is said, John 7. 37, 38, 
^ In the last day, that great day of the 
feast, Jesus stood and cried. If any man 
thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 
He that believe th on me, as the Scrip- 
ture hath said, out of his belly shall 
flow rivers of living water.' This was 
a season of so much rejoicing, that it 
passed into a common proverb, that 
' he that never saw the rejoicing of 
drawing water, never saw rejoicing in 
his life.' 

42. Ye shall dwell in booths. Heb. 
l^'I^iTi iH-Oj besukkoth t'ishebu, ye shall 
sit (abide) in booths. These were 
afterwards, in Jerusalem, constructed 
on the tops of their houses, in their 
court-yards, and in the streets. Neh. | 
8. 16. They w-ere made of the branches 
of various trees, as before remarked^ 



43 m That your generations may 
know that I made the children of 
Israel to dwell in booths, when I 
brought them out of the land of 
Egypt : I am the Lord your God. 

44 And Moses n declared unto 
the children of Israel the feasts of 
the Lord. 

mDeut. 31. 13. Ps. 78. 5, 6. n ver. 2. 

V. 15, and the Hebrew canons affirm 
that they w^ere not to be covered with 
any kind of cloth, or any thing that had 
not grown out of the earth, or with 
aught that was faded or withered, or 
that had an ill savor, or that w^as in any 
way unclean. Maimonides observes 
that this feast was fixed to that season 
when the people could dwell in booths 
w^th the least inconvenience, as the 
weather was then moderate, and they 
w^ere not wont to be troubled either 
with heat or with rain. 



CHAPTER XXIV. 

In the series of the foregoing chap- 
ters w^e have seen that, after the setting 
up of the tabernacle, directions were 
given as to the several kinds of sacri- 
fices that should be offered, and the 
personal qualifications of those that 
should offer them.. Aaron and his sons 
having been duly consecrated, care is 
taken that none of their posterity should 
minister before God but such as w^ere 
every way perfect ; nor were any blem- 
ished animals ever to be allowed to 
come upon the sacred altar. The order 
of the several anniversary festivals 
having been also determined in the pre- 
ceding chapter, the waiter comes in the 
present to treat of the daily service of 
God in the sanctuary, which w^as not 
fully settled in all its details till the 
princes had made their offerings. Num. 
7. 1,2, &c. Its contents, however, are 
somewhat of a varied character, several 
items of an incidental nature being m» 
troduced in the course of it. 



244 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490, 



A 



CHAPTER XXIV. 
ND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 

2 a Command the children of Is- 
rael, that they bring unto thee pure 
oil-olive beaten for the light, to 
cause the lamps to burn con- 
tinually. 

3 Without the vail of the testi- 
mony, in the tabernacle of the con- 
gregation, shall Aaron order it from 
the evening unto the morning be- 
fore the Lord continually : it shall 
be a statute for ever in your gene- 
rations. 

a Exod. 27. 20, 21. 



The Oil for the Lamps. 

2. To cause the lamps to hum. Heb. 
"I^ tliS^nii lehaaloth ner, to cause the 
lamp to ascend ; i.e. the light or flame 
of the lamp. Our version gives ' lamps,' 
in the plural, although the Heb. has 
' lamj).' Yet in v. 4, the original has 

* lamps,' plural. It is doubtless used 
here as a collective, all the seven 
lamps being considered as forming but 
one. In like manner, and in direct al- 
lusion to this, the Holy Spirit, though 
one, is represented by ' seven lamps of 
fire before the throne,' Rev. 4. 5 ; for 
there are ' diversities of gifts, but one 
spirit.' Comp. Ex. 27. 20, Num. 8. 2, 

1 Sam. 3. 3. IT Continually. Heb. 

"T^Jon tamid. That is, from night to 
night ; not without intermission. So 
the ^ continual burnt-offering' means 
that which was regularly offered at the 
appointed season. So Mephibosheth 
was to cat bread at David's table con- 
tinually, i. e. at the stated hom*s of 
meals, 2 Sam. 9. 7, 13. In like manner 
when the Apostle says, 1 Thess. 3. 17, 

* Pray without ceasing,' his meaning 
undoubtedly is, that they were to pray 
constantly, morning and evening, at the 
stated hours of prayer. 

3. Without the vail of the testimony. 
That is, ' without the second vail,^ as it 
is termed, Heb. 9. 3, which separated 



4 He shall order the lamps upon 
bthe pure candlestick before the 
Lord continually. 

5 ^ And thou shalt take fine flour, 
and bake twelve c cakes thereof: 
two tenth-deals shall be in one cake. 

6 And thou shalt set them in two 
rows, six on a row, ^ upon the pure 
table before the Lord. 

7 And thou shall put pure frank- 
incense upon each row, that it may 
be on the bread for a memorial, 



b Exod. 31. 8, and 39. 37. c Exod. 25. 30. 
d 1 Kings 7. 48. 2 Chron. 4. 19, and 13. 11, 
Heb. 9. 2. 



between the holy and most holy place. 
The ark of the covenant is here called 
' the testimony,' because it contained 
the tables of the testimony, as they are 
called, Ex.25. 21. IT From the eve- 
ning unto the morning. The Hebrew 
word liD- baker, properly signifies that 
portion of the morning which inter- 
venes between the break of day and 
sunrise. The other word, "21^ erebj 
implies the time from sunset to dark. 
The priests, therefore, w^ere to look 
after the lamps from very early in the 
morning to late at night. 

The Ordering of the Table of Shew- 
bread. 

6. Thou shalt set them in two rows 
six in a row, upon the pure tablebefore 
the Lord. These loaves are called 
elsewhere the ' bread of the presence/ 
the mystical import of which we have 
fully considered in the Notes on Ex. 20. 
30. They were prepared by the Levites, 
and were twelve in number, to corres- 
pond with the twelve tribes of Israel. 
The table is called < the pure table,^ 
just as the candlestick is called, v. 4, 
^ the pure candlestick,' from the pure 
gold with which it was overlaid, and 
which v/as doubtless always kept clean 
and bright. 

7. That it may be on the bread for a 
memorial. That is, that the frankin- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIV. 



245 



even an offering made by fire unto 
the Lord. 

8 e Every sabbath he shall set it 
in order before the Lord continu- 
ally, being taken from the children 
of Israel by an everlasting covenant. 

9 And fit shall be Aaron's and his 

e Numb. 4. 7. 1 Chron. 9. 32. 2 Chron. 

2. 4. f 1 Sam. 21. 6. Matt. 12. 4. Mark 2. 

26. Luke 6. 4. ? Exod. 29. 33. ch. S. 3, 
and 21. 22. 

cense may be burnt upon the altar of 
incense, instead of the bread ; as the 
handful of the meal-offering with its oil 
and incense, Lev. 2. 2, was to be a me- 
morial of the whole. The frankin- 
cense stood in a golden saucer upon the 
bread during the whole week : on the 
Sabbath the bread was taken away to be 
eaten, and the frankincense was burnt 
in lieu of it. As incense is a symbol 
of prayer, there may have been an inti- 
mation in this appointment, that our 
spiritual food is to be received and 
sanctified with prayer. Indeed, when 
a good man sits down at his table and 
invokes the divine blessing upon his 
daily food, we seem to see the realized 
substance of the vessels of incense upon 
the Levitical loaves. 

8. Being taken from the children of 
Israel. It was taken from the children 
of Israel, inasmuch as it was bought 
wdththe money which they contributed. 
The yearly half-shekel tribute, ordain- 
ed Ex. 30. 13, 16, was doubtless devoted 
to defraying the expenses of the service 
of the sanctuary. 

Of the Blaspheming Son of Shelomith. 
10. The son of an Israelitish woman 
whose father was an Egyptian, went out 
among the children of Israel, &c. The 
insertion of this historical narrative in 
this connexion, in the midst of a body 
of ceremonial and moral laws, has some- 
what of a singular air, but maj^ perhaps 
be satisfactorily explained from the 
hint afforded v. 22, • Ye shall have one 
manner of law, as well for the stranger, 
as for one of your own country ; for I 
21* 



sons' ; g and they shall eat it in the 
holy place : for it is most holy unto 
him of the offerings of the Lord 
made by fire by a perpetual statute. 
ion And the son of an Israelitish 
woman, whose father was an Egyp- 
tian, went out among the children 
of Israel ; and this son of the Israel- 
itish ivo?nan and a man of Israel 
strove together in the camp ; 



am the Lord your God.^ As the writer 
is treating in the present chapter of 
several particulars of the criminal laws, 
the question v/ould naturally arise whe- 
ther and how far those laws were to 
bear upon foreigners, dwelling among 
them as proselytes. The answer to 
this question is not only expressly 
stated in v. 22, but the pertinent case 
of the Egyptian Israelite is also brought 
in by way of illustration. The original 
Hebrew, as rendered literally, runs 
thus : — ' And there went out a son of 
an Israelitess, and he the son of an 
Egyptian man, in the midst of, or 
among the children of Israel,' &c., 
which the Jewish writers generally un- 
derstand as implying that the father 
was a proselyte to the Hebrew faith, as 
Aben-ezra in particular says, ^ he was 
received into the number of the Jews.' 
This is not, perhaps, improbable in 
itself, for as it was now little more than 
a year since they came out of Egypt, 
and yet his son was old enough to strive 
with a man of Israel, he had no doubt 
married the Israelitish woman at least 
some fifteen or twenty years before the 
exodus ; and if so, the presumption 
would no doubt be, that he had embraced 
the religion of her whom he had chosen 
for a wife. Still there is evidently no 
certainty in the intimation, and w^e must 
take it for what it is worth. It is im- 
possible to feel much respect for the 
judgment of men who are constantly 
prone to give a tongue to the silence of 
scripture, and supply its omissions with 
the extravagant and silly fictions of 
their own teeming fancies ; a specimen 



246 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



11 And the Israelitisli woman's 
son ii blasphemed the name of the 
LORD, and i cursed ; and they 

h ver. 16. i Job 1. 6, 11, 22, and 2. 5, 9, 
10. Isai. 8. 21. 

ofwhichisto be seen in the asserted 
genealogy which they have ascribed to 
this son of Shelomith, making his father 
to be no other than tlie man whom 
Moses killed in Egypt. But we know 
nothing more, for we are told nothing 
more, respecting this bold transgressor, 
than that he was now enumerated in the 
congregation of Israel, and that he was 
guilty of the high-handed crime here 
recited. As to the ^ going out ' spoken 
of in the text, it is not clear what is to 
be understood by the expression ; whe- 
ther it refers to his coming out of Egypt , 
or simply to his going out of his tent, 
and engaging in strife abroad. We in- 
cline to the former opinion. 

11. And the Israelitish woman's son 
blasphemed the name of the Lord, and 
cursed, Heb. p^p^l tDlDH tli^: llp^ 
yikkob eth hashshem va-yekaUelj blas- 
phemed the name, and cursed. The 
words, ^ of the Lord,' it will be per- 
ceived, are supplied, not being found in 
the original. Nor does any one of the 
ancient versions, the Chal., the Sam., 
the Syr., the Arab., the Sept., or the 
Vulg., attempt to supply the sacred 
name. There can be no doubt, however, 
that the words are properly supplied, 
and that his crime w^as a bold and im- 
pious profaning the august name of 
Jehovah, which name is perhaps omit- 
ted by the writer in order to evince a 
reverence strikingly in contrast with 
the daring hardihood of the offender. 
The original word Dp"^ yikkob, from 
!3p!3 ndkab, to pierce, bore, or strike 
through, is probably used in this con- 
nexion to imply that blasphemy is a 
kind of striking through or wounding 
with the tongue, as it is said in Pro- 
verbs, ' There is that speaketh the 
piercings of a sword.'' It is elsev/here 
used in the same sense, as Num. 23. 13, 



k brought him unto Moses: (and 
his mother's name was Shelomith, 
the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe 
of Dan :) 

k Exod. 18. 22. 26. 



25, Job. 3. 8, — 5. 3. So, also, the Arabic 
renders it by a word signifying prima- 
rily to cut or per for ate, mid thence used 
figuratively for cursing or malediction. 
Yet it is certain that the Hebrew term 
is employed by way of secondary usage 
in the sense of declaring or expressing 
distinctly, specifying, calling by name, 
as Gen. 30. 28, Num. 1. 17, Is. 62. 3, and 
hence, the Jews, from a very early pe- 
riod, considered themselves as prohibit- 
ed from uttering the name ' Jehovah,' 
except on the most sacred occasions, as 
it is well known that in reading their 
Scriptures they universally substituted 
^Dli^ adonai, Lord, for illn"^ Yehovah, 
wherever it occurs, and in their writings 
employ tlUn hashshem, the name, the 
very word in the passage before us. It 
is also to be remarked, that the Gr. has 
e-rrovonacTas to ovona^ having named the 
name, while Onkelos and the Syriac 
have, distinctly expressed, and the Arab, 
of Erpenius, pronounced. The proba- J 
bility, we think is, that this idea is act- ™ 
ually included in the meaning of the 
term -, that there was a distinct and at 
the same time opprobrious and profane 
utterance of that name which is above 
every name, the holy designation of the 
infinite and eternal God, which ought 
never to be uttered without a trembling 
awe upon the spirit. Houbigant, indeed, 
and some others, suppose that the blas- 
phemer did not use the name of the 
true God at all, but had been swearing 
by one of the gods of his country, and 
that his crime was mentioning the 
name of a strange god in the camp of 
Israel. But upon reference to the law, 
enacted v. 16, there seems no good rea- 
son to consider this a sound interpreta- 
tion ', for we find that tDlLNI hashshem, the 
name, in the latter part of the verse 
answers to tlin** ^^ shem Yehovah^ 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIV. 



247 



12 And they ^put him inward, 
*»that the mind of the Lord might 
be shewed them. 

13 And the Lord spake unto 
Moses, saying, 

1 Numb. 15. 34. m Exod. 13. 15, 16. Num. 
27. 5, aud 36. 6, 6. 



the name of Jehovah, in the former 
part. The Jews also frequently use 
t"i:n hashshem, for Jehovah ; and that 
it was an ancient custom thus to al- 
lude to the Deity, without mentioning 
his name, appears from inscriptions 
among the Palmyrenians, on whose 
marbles we find, ^ To the blessed name 

be fear for ever to the blessed name, 

forever good, and merciful, be fear 

to the blessed name for ever be fear,' 
&c. nr And cursed. It is not un- 
likely that being arraigned before the 
magistrates, and sentence being given 
against him, he in a fit of exasperation 
spoke blasphemous words against God, 
renouncing his worship, and cursing the 

judges who had condemned him. 

^And they brought him unto Moses, 
&c. The case was new and unprece- 
dented, and as there Vs'^as no law by 
which the amount of guilt could be de- 
termined, nor, consequently, " the de- 
gree of punishment, it was necessary 
to consult the Great Lawgiver on the 
occasion. Moses, no doubt, had re- 
course to the tabernacle, and received 
the directions afterwards mentioned, 
from the Shekinah dwelling between 
the cherubim. The answer was proba- 
bly by the Urim and Thummim. 

12. And they put him in ward, that 
the mind of the Lord might he shewed 
them. Chal. ^ Until it was expounded 
unto them by the decree of the Word 
of the Lord.^ Gr. oiaKpivai avrov oca 
TTpoaTayuarog K.vpiov, to judge him by 
the commandment of the Lord. Im- 
prisonment is no where m.entioned in 
the books of Moses, or in the early his- 
torical books, as a punishment, but 
only as a means of keeping a criminal 
in safe custody till the time of trial. 



14 Brin^ forth him that hath 
cursed without the camp ; and let 
all that heard him nlay their hands 
upon his head, and let all the con- 
gregation stone him. 

n Deut. 13. 9, aud 17. 7, 

As a precedent was now to be set for 

future ages, it became them to proceed 
with due deliberation. 

14. Bring forth him that hath cursed, 
without the camp. As the camp of 
Israel was holy, the execution of one 
who had rendered himself so abomina- 
ble and accursed v.^ould bring a defile- 
ment upon it which was not to be tol- 
erated. U Lay their hands upon his 

head. By this testimony the people 
who heard him curse bore their public 
testimony in order to his being fully 
convicted ; and it was moreover a sig- 
nificant mode of saying to the man, 
' Thy blood be upon thine own head ; 
we hereby clear ourselves of all partici- 
pation in thy guilt.' We find no other 
instance of this ceremony of the impo- 
sition of hands in the case of a con- 
demned malefactor, and the Jew^s hold 
it to be peculiar to the sin of blasphemy, 
' Of all that are killed,' says Maimoni- 
des, ' by the Sanhedrin, there is none 
upon whom they impose hands save the 
blasphemer only.' These remarks will 
be found to illustrate the account given 
in the New^ Testament of the deaths of 
our Lord and of St. Stephen, who were 
both murdered under a false charge of 
blasphemy. The crime of the judges 
and witnesses in these cases was in de- 
claring them guilty of blasphemy, not 
in pronouncing blasphemy to deserve 
death. The criminal codes of most 
Christian countries ha^e denounced 
death as the ultimate punishment of 
blasphemy, in imitation of the law in 
this chapter : but these codes dififer 
very much in the definition of blas- 
phemy ; and it is perhaps owing to this 
that the capital penalty is at present 
nowhere enforced, even where it retains 



248 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1490. 



15 And thou shalt speak unto the 
children of Israel, saying, Whoso- 
ever curseth his God « shall bear 
his sin. 

16 And he that pblasphemeth the 
nanae of the Lord, he shall surely 
be put to death, and all the con- 
gregation shall certainly stone him : 

o ch. 5. 1, and 20. 17. Numb. 9. 13. 
P 1 Kings 21. 10, 13. Ps. 74. 10, 18. Matt. 
12, 31. Mark 3. 28, Jam. 2. 7. 

its place in the statute-books. In esti- 
mating the enormity of the offence, we 
must not overlook the circumstance 
of aggravation, that the act of blas- 
phemy against Jehovah was both a re- 
ligious and political crime, he being 
not only the God, but the king of the 
Hebrew nation. 

15. And thou shalt speakj &c. The 
present transaction, as might be ex- 
pected, gave rise to a standing law on 
the subject. Whoever spake disre- 
spectfully or reproachingly of God, un- 
der any of his titles, was to be put to 
death. 

16. He that hlasphemeth the name of 
the Lord, &c. Heb. mrT^ tD^J np!] no- 
k'eb shem Yehovah, the blasphemer of the 
name of Jehovah. Chal. ^ He that ex- 
presseth.* Gr. oj/o/ia^cov to ovofia Kvpiov, 
he that nameth the name of the Lord. 
The original is the same word that oc- 
curs v. 11, and here, as there, implies a 
blasphemous J distinct uttering. Whe- 
ther the clause is intended to express a 
higher degree of the sin mentioned in 
the preceding verse, or whether it is 
only a repetition of the same sentence, 
with a more express designation of the 
punishment, is uncertain. The Jews, 
for the most part, understand it of him 
only who expressed the rzame, i.e. the 
most holy name of God, or Jehovah, as 
the Targ. Jerus. says, on Deut. 32., 
* Woe unto those that in their execra- 
tions use the holy name, which it is not 
lawful for the highest angel to express.' 
But Maimonides says, ' There be some 
that expound it, that he is not guilty of 



as well the stranger, as he that is 
born in the land, when he hlas- 
phemeth the name of the LORD, 
shall be put to death. 

17 IF q And he that killeth any 
man shall surely be put to death. 

18 rAndhe that killeth a beast 
shall make it good ; beast for beast. 

19 And if a man cause a blemish 

q Exod. 21. 12. Numb. 35. 31. Deut. 19. 
11, 12. r ver. 21. 

death save for the name * Jehovah.' 
Yet I say, for * Adonai ' also he is to be 
stoned.' It was from this passage es- 
pecially that the rabbinical restraint 
arose as to uttering the name ' Jeho- 
vah,' either in reading the Scriptures or 
otherwise, except in the sanctuary, 
when the priest blessed the people, ac- 
cording to the law. Num. 6. 23-27. And 
so long was this practice in vogue 
among them that the true pronunciation 
of the word has become lost ; the cur- 
rent pronunciation depending upon vow- 
els that do not belong to it. But there 
is no question that this is merely a su- 
perstitious scruple, for Avhich nothing 
more than a forced traditionary inter- 
pretation can be pleaded. 

The Law of Murder. 
17. He that killeth any man. Heb. 
t3nfc< UJDD ii ni^ yakkeh kol nephesh 
dddm, that smiteth the life, or soul, of 
a man. As this statute has been before 
explained, Ex.21. 12, the only question 
here, is respecting the reasons of its in- 
sertion in this connexion. The true an 
swer is perhaps to be gathered from the 
context. The subsequent verses evince 
that both native-born Israelites and 
sojourning proselytes were to be sub- 
ject to the same penal laws. Inas- 
much, then, as a stranger was to be put 
to death for killing a man, let no one 
deem it hard that he should be punish- 
ed for blasphemy with equal severity 
with the son of Israel. It seems to be 
introduced by way of obviating a query 
that might arise as to punishing bias- 



B. C. 1490.] 



CHAPTER XXIV. 



249 



in his neighbour ; as s he hath done, 
so shall it be done unto him : 

20 Breach for breach, eye for eye, 
tooth for tooth : as he hath caused 
a blemish in a man, so shall it be 
done to him again. 

21 tAnd he that killeth a beast, 
he shall restore it: uand he that 
killeth a man, he shall be put to 
death. 

s Exod, 21. 24. Bent. 19. 21. Matt. 5. 38, 
and 1. 2. t Exod. 21. 33. ver. 18. u ver. 17, 

phemy in a foreigner, ia so exemplary 
a manner. 

As to the remaining precepts in this 
chapter, the marginal references will 
point to the places where the 3^ are mi- 
nutely explained. 

Remarks.— (10-16.) The prominent 
reflection suggested by the present nar- 
rative is, the greatness and grievous- 
ness of the sin of blasphemy. If we 
are assured that for every idle word 
w^hich men shall speak they shall give 
an account thereof in the day of judg- 
ment, how^ much more for every profane 
and impious one ! If even neglect of 
God be a high oflence against him, in 
whom wc live, and move, and have our 
being, and who has given his son to die 
for our sins, how much deeper in enor- 
mity and blacker in dye must be such 
contempt and defiance of his majesty ! 
How fearful to give w^ay to the evil pas- 
sions which prompt the lips to break 
forth in irreverent and blasphemous ex- 
clamations ! Although the man who is 
guilty of this iniquity may not now 
come under an express statute that con- 
demns him to death, yet let him not 
forget that there is an ear which hears, 
and a book of remembrance that con- 
tains all his ^ ungodly speeches,' and 
will assuredly mete out to him the 
due reward of his guilt. 

It is moreover to be rem.embered that 
blasphemy is not confined to the mere 
profane use of the name or titles of the 
Most High. Any kind of disparaging 



I 22 Ye shall have ^ one manner of 
law, as well for the stranger, as 
for one of your own country : for I 
am the Lord your God. 

23 H And Moses spake to the 
children of Israel, y that they should 
bring forth him that had cursed out 
of the camp, and stone him with 
stones: and the children of Israel 
did as the Lord commanded Moses. 

X Exod. 12. 49, ch. 19. 34. Numb. 15. 16. 
y ver. 14. 

or contemptuous reflections thrown out 
against the power or grace of God 
comes into the same category in the 
estimation of the Scriptures. Thus 
Rabshakeh is charged with blasphemy 
for asserting that the God of Israel had 
no more powder than the gods of the 
heathen . And thus the Psalmist pleads, 
' God, how long shall the adversary 
reproach, shall the many blaspheme thy 
name for ever?' Thus, moreover, Paul 
says of himself that he was before his 
conversion a blasphemer, because he 
had spoken against and opposed the 
grace of Christ ; and doubtless it is for 
the same reason that James says of the 
rich men of his day, ' Do they not blas- 
pheme that w^orthy name by which ye 
are called?^ And while opposition to 
Christ is thus looked upon in Scripture, 
how dreadful is the denunciation against 
this sin when committed against the 
Holy Ghost. From all this we cannot 
but be reminded how careful it behoves 
us to be not to reproach the Lord in his 
word, or works, or w^ays ; not to object 
against the Gospel, or to endeavor to 
hinder its progress, and not to detract 
from those glorious operations of power 
or grace wrought by the Holy Spirit ia 
the souls of men, lest we incur the guilt 
of this fearful sin. 

And lastly, let us beware of causing 
others to blaspheme. We may lead 
men to curse by irritating their passions, 
and we may cause them to speak evil 
of the Lord by the commission of sins 
which shall bring discredit upon reli- 



250 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



CHAPTER XXV. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses in Mount Sinai, saying, 
2 Speak unto the children of Is- 
rael, and say unto them, When ye 



gion. See a melancholy instance of this 
in the history of David, and the heavy 
charge brought against him on this very 
account j ' Because by this deed thou 
hast given great occasion to the ene- 
mies of the Lord to blaspheme.^ Hear 
the strong reproof of the apostle Paul 
to the Jews who lived not according to 
the principles and precepts of their law, 
* The name of God,' says he, ' is blas- 
phemed among the Gentiles through 
you.' And alas, it is chargeable upon 
many nominal Christians, to their great 
reproach and shame, that while residing 
in foreign lands among heathens, Ma- 
hometans, and other rejecters of the Gos- 
pel, they live in a manner so negligent 
of religion, and so dissolute as to bring 
the greatest disgrace upon the sacred 
cause of Christianity. The same effects 
may be produced by those who live at 
home. It is to be feared that many a one 
has been encouraged in sin, hardened in 
heart, and driven to the grossest enor- 
mities in profane swearing and cursing, 
and every breach of the divine law, by 
the irreligious and immoral lives of 
persons, and by the scoffing and con- 
temptuous speech of those professing 
the religion of Christ. God forbid that 
we should thus dishonor the truth, and 
ruin our souls .' 



CHAPTER XXV. 

The Law of the Sabbatical Year. 
1 . And the Lord spake unto Moses in 
Mount Sinai. That is, in the wilder- 
ness or region of Sinai, in the vicinity 
of the mount, where the people were 
now encamped. ' Mount ' is often used 
in the Scriptures for ' mountainous re- 
gion.' The congregation remained for 
a year in the neighborhood of the hal- 



come into the land which I give 
you, then shall the land keep a a 
sabbath unto the Lord. 



a Exod. 23. 10. 
36. 21. 



See ch. 26. 34, 35. 2 Chron. 



lowed mount, from whence they did not 
remove till the twentieth day of the 
second month of the second year after 
their coming out of Egypt, Num. 10. 
11, 12. All that is here related was 
undoubtedly delivered to Moses in the 
first month of the second year after the 
exodus, immediately subsequent to the 
setting up of the tabernacle, Ex. 40. 17. 
2. Then shall the land keep a sabbath 
unto the Lord. Heb. ttllD f^fc^ HtaD 
mrr^J shdbethdh eretz shabbdth laiho- 
vah, shall the land sabbatize a sabbath 
unto the Lord. Gr. ava-navacrai rj yrij 
the land shall rest. Chal. ' The land 
shall be remitted a remission,' which, 
though a barbarism in our language, 
still conveys an intelligible idea. This 
year of rest to the land is a very promi- 
nent feature of the sabbatic system, 
which formed so prominent and distin- 
guishing a part of the Hebrew polity. 
As man was commanded and privileged 
on the seventh day to abstain from that 
labor to which he had subjected himself 
by sin, so, on the seventh year, the 
earth was also to rest, and enjoy, as it 
were, a respite from the effects of the 
curse. The prominent circumstances 
which distinguished the sabbatical year 
from common years may be thus enu- 
merated. (1.) All agricultural opera- 
tions were to be suspended, and the 
land was to lie fallow. The whole 
country must, in fact, have been thrown 
into one vast common, free to the poor 
and the stranger, to the domestic cattle 
and the game ; for the proprietor of the 
land not only ceased to cultivate it, but 
had no exclusive right to its spontane- 
ous produce, although he might share 
in it. (2.) The produce of every sixth 
year was promised to be such as would 
support them till the harvest of the 



I 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXV. 



251 



3 Six years thou shalt sow thy 
field, audsix years thou shalt prune 
thy viaeyard, and gather in the 
fruit thereof; 

ninth year ; a circumstance which 
would clearly demonstrate a particular 
providence in respect to the institution. 
(3.) It was a season of release from 
debts due from one Israelite to another ; 
but not those due from foreigners to 
Israelites. (4.) Every Hebrew slave 
had the option of being released this 
year from his servitude. At least this 
is often inferred from Ex. 21. 2 ; but 
it will be seen by reference to the Note 
on that passage to be quite doubtful 
whether the seventh j^ear there men- 
tioned was not the seventh year of his 
actual service, rather than the sabbat- 
ical year. (5.) In the sabbatical year, 
at the feast of tabernacles, they were 
enjoined to read the law in the hearing 
of all the people. This was called by 
the Rabbinical writers ' the reading of 
the king,' because tradition made the 
king himself the reader on this occasion. 

It is not to be supposed that this year 
of rest to the land was necessarily 
spent by the Hebrews in idleness. 
They could fish, hunt, take care of their 
bees and flocks, repair their buildings 
and furniture, manufacture clothes, and 
carry on their usual traffic. 

In adverting to the various political 
and moral designs of this institution, 
we may observe, in the first place, that 
the land itself would experience the 
happy effects of lying fallow one year, 
in itself. Incessant culture tends to ex- 
haust the strength of the soil, although 
this is in great measure counteracted in 
modern times by the expedient of a 
rotation of crops. But there is no doubt 
that among the Israelites the land re- 
maining one year untilled, would re- 
cruit itself for a more vigorous fertility 
afterwards. Again, the institution was 
calculated to remind the chosen people 
that God was the great Proprietor of all, 
and that they were mere tenants, holding 



4 But in the seventh year shall 
be a sabbath of rest unto the land, 
a sabbath for the Lord : thou shalt 



their earthly possessions upon certaia 
prescribed conditions, with which they 
could not safely dispense. Closely 
connected with this, was the influence 
which the Sabbatic year would have in 
cherishing appropriate sentiments of 
piety, and leading them to a practical 
trust in an overruling providence. 
When they saw the Sabbatic year at 
hand, how forcibly would they be im- 
pressed with the goodness of God in 
making provision for it ! They would 
have three years to live on the produce 
of one single year. And when they 
beheld their barns overflowing with the 
produce of the earth, and their presses 
bursting out with new wine, could they 
refrain from saying, ^ This is the hand 
of the Lord ; how can we but feel deep- 
ly sensible to his love and kindness ? 
How can we refuse to love, serve, and 
trust forever so gracious a benefactor? ' 
The observance of this season was, in 
fact, a test of their belief in the imme- 
diate superintending providence of God, 
and grieved we are to be obliged to 
say, that under this test the Israelites 
failed j and their failure was a na- 
tional sin, which constituted one of 
the grand procuring causes of their 
subsequent long captivity in Babylon. 
This fact seems to be anticipated, Lev. 
26. 33-35, as not unlikely to happen, 
and when the captivity actually came, 
the years of its continuance correspond- 
ed with the number of the neglected 
sabbatic years ; and as these were sev- 
enty, this would carry us back about 500 
years to the commencement of the 
kingly government, as the time at which 
the observance was discontinued. After 
the captivity it was more scrupulously 
observed. 

4. A sabbath of rest unto the land. 
Heb. y]ri2V MulD shabbath shabbathon, 
a sabbath of sabbatism ; a phrase of 



252 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



neither sow thy field, nor prune 
thy vineyard. 

5 bThat which groweth of its 
own accord of thy harvest, thou 
shalt not reap, neither gather the 
grapes of thy vine undressed : for 
it is a year of rest unto the land. 

6 And the sabbath of the land 
shall be meat for you; for thee, 
and for thy servant, and for thy 

b 2 Kings 19. 29. 

great intensity of import, which we 
have previously explained. In its typi- 
cal scope the ordinance no doubt pointed 
forward to the great sabbatical period 
of the world, v/hich according to a very 
ancient Jewish tradition, is to succeed 
the previous six thousand years. These, 
according to the Rabbins, are distributed 
as follows ; — Two thousand before the 
law J two thousand under the law ; and 
two thousand under the Messiah. Then 
comes the grand period of bliss and 

glory to the world. IT Thou shalt 

neither sow thy field nor prune thy 
vineyard. That is, the superfluous 
shoots and branches which the husband- 
man cuts to make the trees more fruitful. 
5. Neither gather the grapes of thy 
vine undressed. Heb. ^^""itD ^^23? in- 
neb'e nezireka, the grapes of thy separa- 
tion. Gr. Tr]v aTa(j)v\r]V tov ayiaaixarog aov, 
the grapes of the sanctification. Chal. 
' the vine of thy leaving ;' i. e. which 
thou art to leave uncultivated.' The 
original word ^'^I'^t!: nezireka, is de- 
rived from li;: nazar, to separate j from 
which comes ' Nazarite,' one separated, 
one devoted to God for a season by spe- 
cial consecration. One requisi te in this 
case, was that the hair should be suf- 
fered to grow without being shaven ; 
and in like manner the vineyard of the 
Israelites being in a sense consecrated 
to God for the space of the sabbatical 
year, it was to be left in the condition 
of the Nazarite's head, untouched by 
knife or pruning-hook. This is the rea- 
son of its being rendered in our transla- 
tion ' undressed-' 



maid, and for thy hired servant, 
and for thy stranger that sojourn- 
eth with thee, 

7 And for thy cattle, and for the 
beast that are in thy land, shall all 
the increase thereof be meat. 

8 H And thou shalt number seven 
sabbaths of years unto thee, seven 
times seven years ; and the space 
of the seven sabbaths of years shall 
be unto thee forty and nine years. 

6. The sabbath of the land shall be 
meat for you. ' Sabbath of the land ' 
is here used by a figure of speech for the 
fruit of the sabbath, i. e. of the sabbat- 
ical year. In like manner the word 
« sabbaths ^ is used ch. 23. 38, for the 
sacrifices of the sabbath. It would 
seem from this that the prohibition of 
gathering corn and fruits in this year 
was not absolute, for the products of 
the vine and olive, and the milk and 
honey would continue as usual. 

The Jubilee. 

8. Thou shalt number seven sabbaths 
of years. The term ' sabbath ' here is 
used in the sense of ^ week,' as before 
explained, so that as a literal w^eek 
consisted of seven days, a sabbath of 
weeks consisted of seven years. It is 
not, however, to be understood that the 
jubilee was to be celebrated on the 
forty-ninth, h\xi on \\\e fiftieth ye^x, 
as is evident from v. 11. The forty- 
ninth was the ordinary seventh or sab- 
batical year, so that, in fact, two holy 
years came together. Thus writes 
Maimonides : ' The year of jubilee 
Cometh not into the count of the years 
of the seven j but the nine and fortieth 
year is the release, and the fiftieth year 
the jubilee.' The jubilee, therefore, 
was proclaimed on the forty-ninth and 
celebrated on the fiftieth year. 

The institution here described is one 
of the most interesting and important 
of all the appointments which charac- 
terized the Jewish economy. It com- 
menced on the first day of the month 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXV. 



253 



Tisri, that is, the civil new year's day. 
Its distinguishing features were the fol- 
lowing : — 

(1.) As in the sabbatical year, so in 
this, the people were neither to sow nor 
to reap, and the spontaneous products 
of the earth were to be accounted com- 
mon property. Thus there were two 
years at every jubilee, when the Jews 
neither sowed nor reaped ; namely, the 
jubilee and the year before, which was 
always a sabbatical year ; and hence 
we see the reason why the promise of 
support, given in Lev. 25. 20-22, was 
from the sixth till the harvest of the 
ninth year. We have only two pas- 
sages of Scripture where this promise 
is alluded to, viz., 2 Kings 19. 29, and 
Is. 37. 30. 

(2.) The second thing remarkable in 
the year of jubilee was, that all the 
lands which had been sold by one He- 
brew to another, had a reference to this, 
being valued according to its proximity 
or remoteness, in order to their being 
restored in that year ; or might be re- 
deemed sooner by giving to the owner 
a proper compensation. 

(3.) All sales of houses in the coun- 
try, w^ere returned likewise at that time, 
or could have been redeemed sooner ; 
but all dwelling houses in walled cities, 
unless redeemed within a year, re- 
mained for ever with the possessor, ex- 
cept in the case of houses belongmg to 
the Levites, which might have been 
redeemed at any time, although in wall- 
ed cities ; and if not redeemed, returned 
to them again as a matter of course in 
the year of jubilee. 

(4.) All Israelites who on account of 
poverty had sold themselves, that is to 
say their services, to Israelites, were 
not to be reckoned as bond, but as hired 
servants, and \vere to return unto their 
families and fathers' possessions in the 
year of jubilee. 

(5.) All poor Israelites who on ac- 
count of poverty had sold themselves to 
proselytes, w^ere to be accounted hired 
servants, and might be redeemed at any 

22 



time by their relatives or themselves ; 
but, if not redeemed, were to obtain 
their liberty at the jubilee. 

(6.) As the Jewish kings had com- 
monly much in their power, they were 
expressly forbidden, on the one hand, 
to seize the possession of any Israelite 
as a provision for their family, or on 
the other to squander the royal domains 
on favorites, as that w^ould have lessen- 
ed the patrimony of the crown ; and if 
any such grants were at any time made, 
they reverted, of course, to the original 
proprietors in the year of jubilee. 

Such was the nature of the Jewish 
jubilee J but we do not find that any 
particular sacrifices were appointed, 
nor even that reading of the law which 
was enjoined in the sabbatical year ; 
neither is it clear at what hour of the 
day of annual expiation the silver trum- 
pets sounded to announce its commence- 
ment. It is probable, however, that it 
was in the evening, after the high priest 
had entered the most holy place, the 
scape goat had been sent into the wil- 
derness, and the people, in full concert 
in the temple, had been praising the 
Lord for his goodness, and because his 
mercy endureth for ever. Imagination 
may conceive, but it is beyond the 
power of language to describe, the gen- 
eral burst of joy that would pervade the 
land, w^hen the poor Israelites tasted 
again the sweets of liberty, and returned 
to their possessions, their families, and 
friends. In vain would sleep invite 
them to repose — their hearts would be 
too full to feel the lassitude of nature ; 
and the night would be spent in grati- 
tude and praise. What a lively em- 
blem of the gospel of Christ ! which is 
peculiarly addressed to the poor, which 
is fitted to heal the broken hearted, to 
give deliverance to the captives, the 
opening of the prison doors to them 
that are bound, and to preach unto all 
the acceptable year of the Lord. 

The true origin of the term ' Jubilee ' 
is somewhat doubtful. We trace it in- 
deed to the Heb. ^^ll'i yobelj but the 



254 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



genuine sense of this word is the great 
matter of debate. Some derive it from 
Jubal, the inventor of musical instru- 
ments, Gen. 4. 21, and suppose that this 
year was named after him from its 
being a year of mirth and joy, on which 
music is a common attendant. Our 
English word jovial is traced to the 
same origin. Others, particularly D. 
Kimchi, contend that jobel (yobel) sig- 
nifies a ram in Arabic, and that this 
year was so called because it was pro- 
claimed with trumpets made of rams^ 
horns. This is somewhat countenanced 
by the Chal. Targ. which occasionally 
renders yobel by i^'^^D'^T dikra, a ram. 
Bochart and others, however, doubt 
whether rams' horns were ever employed 
as trumpets, but think that the ' horns,' 
' cornets,' &c. of the Scripture were 
either the horns of oxen, or brazen 
trumpets in the form of rams^ horns. 
Hottinger is of opinion that yobel is a 
word designed to denote rather the pe- 
culiar kind of sound made by the instru- 
ment, than the instrument itsell'*. Bishop 
Patrick espouses this etymology, and 
conceives the year to have been called 
yobel from the sound every where made, 
..just as the feast of the Passover was 
called nC>& pesa^h, from the angel's 
passing over the Israelites when he 
slew the Egyptians. Another, and per- 
haps as probable an opinion as any of 
the preceding is, that ^ini"^' yobel comes 
from the verb J)^*! ydbal, which in Hi- 
phil is i'^lDin hobilj and signifies to 
recall, restore, bring back • because this 
year restored liberty to the slaves, and 
brought back alienated estates to their 
original possessors. This would seem 
to be the view which the Sept. takes of 
the word by rendering it a(pEaig, a remis- 
sion, and also Josephus, who renders it 
s^evOrjpiav, liberty. From this variety 
of interpretations the reader is neces- 
sarily left by the commentator to choose 
that which he deems most plausible. 
Absolute certainty is unattainable. 

Whatever may be the meaning of the 
term, and whatever the nature of the 



instruments employed, it is held by all 
the Jewish writers that trumpets were 
sounded extensively all over the land, 
in the mountains, in the streets, and at 
nearly every door. It was intended as 
a universal waking up of all the popu- 
lation to the occurrence of this joyous 
festival. It v/as not enough that the 
year and the day should be fixed, and 
come round in silence. The spirits 
which had been depressed by great re- 
verses of fortune were to be exhilarated 
by the cheering annunciation, and all 
indifference and torpor to be shaken off. J 
The Jubilee in fact began on the first ^ 
day of the month Tisri, but the real ob- 
jects of the institution did not develope 
themselves till the tenth which was the 
great day of atonement. But the pre- 
vious nine days were spent in great fes- 
tivity and joy, resembling in some 
respects the Roman Saturnalia. The 
slaves did no work for their masters, 
but crowned themselves with garlands, 
and ate, and drank, and made merry. 
On the tenth day, the proper authori- 
ties, called ^ the house of judgment,* or 
the great Sanhedrim, directed the trum- 
pets to be sounded 5 and at that instant 
the bondmen became free, and lands 
reverted to their original owners. 

The two grand distinguishing charac- 
teristics of the Jubilee v;ere evidently 
manumission of servants and the resti- 
tution of estates. If any of the Israel- 
ites had been reduced to a state of sla- 
very, whether he had sold himself 
voluntarily, or had been sold for debt, 
or theft, or any other cause, by the 
sentence of the judge, now was the 
season of his release. The day dawned ; 
the trumpet-peal was heard, and the 
chains of bondage fell from the exulting 
slave. With his wife and children, and 
all that he had, he set forth from the 
house of his bondage, and felt himself 
possessed of liberty which no hand of 
power or of fraud might invade. Even 
those who had not seen fit to avail 
themselves of the emancipation afforded 
by the law at the end of six years' ser. 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXV. 



255 



9 Then shalt thou cause the trum- 
pet of the jubilee to sound, on the 

vitude, but had expressed their deter- 
mination, by having their ears bored 
with an awl, and fastened to the door 
of their master's house, vv'ere now to go 
out perfectly free under the general 
proclaniation of liberty to the captive. 
How striking a type of the release from 
spiritual thraldom as announced at the 
Gospel Jubilee, when our Saviour in the 
synagogue read from the prophet Isaiah, 
* The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, 
because he hath anointed me to preach 
the gospel to the poor,' he hath sent me 
to heal the broken-hearted, to preach 
deliverance to the captives, and recov- 
ering of sight to the blind, to set at lib- 
erty them that are bruised, to preach 
the acceptable year of the Lord ;' and 
then added, ' This day is this Scripture 
fulfilled in your ears.' The Gospel 
dispensation is the sinner's jubilee, and 
as the word ' jubilee ' implies a joyful 
sound, so the word ^Gospel' signifies 
glad tidings 5 and blessed are they who 
hear and welcome the sound of joy 
which it sends forth. 

No less benign and gracious was the 
other feature of this remarkable insti- 
tution. If any of the Israelites, through 
misfortune, imprudence, or misconduct, 
had been obliged to sell his patrimonial 
lands, or any part of them, they were 
returned to him free of incumbrance at 
the year of Jubilee, if he could not re- 
deem them sooner. No matter how 
often the property had changed hands, 
it was now restored to the original 
owner or to his heirs. The Israelite 
whom calamity or improvidence had 
driven abroad, needed no longer to wan- 
der for want of a home of his own to 
welcome him. A home there always 
was, would he but choose to reclaim it. 
How wise and merciful this appoint- 
ment ! How admirably adapted to pre- 
serve a wholesome equality of condi- 
tion among all classes I The rich could 
oot accumulate ail the lands, nor esta- 



tenth daij of the seventh month, 



blish a permanent monopoly of wealth. 
The man of avarice, who had gone on 
adding house to house and field to field, 
gained no permanent advantage over his 
less fortunate neighbor. The fiftieth 
year, beyond which no lease could run, 
was always approaching with silent but 
sure speed, to relax his tenacious grasp. 
However alienated, however unworthily 
or unthriftily sold, however strongly 
conveyed to the purchaser or the usurper 
an estate might be, this long-expected 
day annulled the whole transaction, and 
placed the debtor in the condition which 
either himself or his ancestor had en- 
joyed. In virtue, moreover, of this 
gracious ordinance forbidding the per- 
petual alienation of the land, a regular 
genealogy of every particular tribe and 
family would be preserved, and thus 
evidence afforded of the exact fulfil- 
ment of the prophecies respecting the 
Messiah, and the stock from which he 
should spring. 

So marked was the wisdom, so man- 
ifold the blessings of this divine institu- 
tion ! That its typical import conducts 
us onward to the heart of the gospel 
economy, as ushered in by Christ, we 
have already remarked. But that it 
has a reach still more extended, and, 
like the sabbatical year, shadows out a 
state of permanent prosperity, happi- 
ness, joy, and glory, in the latter periods 
of this world's history, we have no 
doubt. Like many other features of the 
Levitical economy, its substance has 
never yet been realized. That is re- 
served for that blissful era announced 
by the seventh, or jubilee trumpet of 
the Apocalypse, when the grand con- 
summ.ation of all prophetic blessedness 
shall take place. 

9. Thou shalt cause the trumpet of 
the jubilee to sound. Heb. fi'l^S^n 
uS^'I'lt"! ^STiD haabarta shopher teruahy 
shalt cause to pass through the trumpet 
of loud sound. That is, shalt cause it 



256 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



cin the day of atonement shall ye 
make the trumpet sound through- 
out all your land. 

10 And ye shall hallow the fifti- 
eth year, and ti proclaim liberty 
throughout a// the land unto all the 
inhabitants thereof: it shall be a 
jubilee unto you; ©and ye shall 
return every man unto his posses- 
sion, and ye shall return every man 
unto his family. 

11 A jubilee shall that fiftieth 
year be unto you : f ye shall not 

c ch. 23. 24, 27. ^ Isai. 61. 2, and 63. 4. 
Jer. 34. 8, 15, 17. Luke 4. 19. e ver. 13. 
Numb. 36. 4. f ver. 5. 

to be sounded all over the land from one 
end to the other, that the most general 
proclamation might be made. Thus in 
Ezra 1. 1, ^ The Lord stirred up the 
spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, that he 
made a jprodamation throughout all his 
kingdom.' Heb. ' He made a voice to 
jpass through all his kingdom.' The 
Hebrew word answering to ^jubilee ' in 
the next verse does not occur here, and 
the utmost accuracy would perhaps 
have led to the adoption of another 
mode of rendering. In Num. 10. 5, the 
word for ' loud sound ' is rendered 

* alarm ' — ' when ye blow an alarm J 

IT In the day of atonement. This was 
the general fast-day, in which, with 
every returning year, the whole con- 
gregation humbled themselves and 
afflicted their souls before God, and the 
high-priest made atonement for them in 
the holy place. The annunciation of 
the jubilee was very wisely fixed to 
this period, as it might be considered 
that they would be better disposed to 
forgive their brethren their debts when 
they had so recently been receiving the 
pardon of their own trespasses. The 
Jubilee was a festival of joy, and a 
sanctified joy can be preceded by no- 
thing tnore suitable than deep humilia- 
tion and godly sorrow lor sin. 

10. Proclaim liberty. That is, lib- 
erty for Hebrew servants to leave the 



sow, neither reap that which grow- 
eth of itself in it, nor gather the 
grapes in it of thy vine undressed. 

12 For it is the jubilee ; it shall 

be holy unto you : g ye shall eat the . 
increase thereof out of the field. ■ 

13 hin the year of this jubilee ye 
shall return every man unto his 
possession. 

14 And if thou sell aught unto 
thy neighbour, or buyest aught of 
thy neighbour's hand, iye shall 
not oppress one another : 

S ver. 6, 7. h ver. 10. ch. 27. 24, Numb. 
36. 4. i ver. 17. ch. 19. 13. 1 Sam. 12. 3, 
4. Mic. 2. 2. 1 Cor. 6. 8. 



service of their masters ; particularly 
such as had not availed themselves of 
the privilege granted, Ex. 21. 2, 6, of 
going out of servitude on the seventh 
year, but had their ears bored as a sig- 
nal of serving ' for ever,' or until the 
year of jubilee arrived. But now that 
year having arrived, their ' ever ' was at 
an end, and they went out of course. 

IF Ye shall return every man unto 

his possession. To his house or land, 
which he may have been compelled to 
sell, and to his family, from which he 
may have been estranged by the loss of 
his liberty. The Israelites had a por- 
tion of land divided to each family by 
lot. This portion of the promised land 
they held of God, and were not to dis- 
pose of it as their property in fee-sim- 
ple. Hence no Israelite could part 
with his landed estate but for a term of 
years only. When the jubilee arrived 
it again reverted to the original owners. 

12. Ye shall eat the increase thereof 
out of the field. That is, the sponta- 
neous increase or produce. 

14. If thou sell aught) &c. As the 
divine lawgiver took care that the 
wealth of some should not oppress the 
poverty of others, by the law of jubilee 
that a poor man should not lose his land 
for ever ; so in buying the land of the 
poor he would not have the rich give 
less for it than it was worth, any more 



B, C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXV. 



257 



15 k According to the number of 
years after the jubilee, thou shalt 
buy of thy neighbour, and accord- 
ing unto the number of years of 
the fruits he shall sell unto thee : 

16 According to the multitude of 
years thou shalt increase the price 
thereof, and according to the few- 
ness of years thou shalt diminish 
the price of it : for according to 
the number of the years of the 
fruits doth he sell unto thee. 

17 lYe shall not therefore op- 
press one another ; m but thou 
shalt fear thy God : for I am the 
Lord your God. 

18 H n Wherefore ye shall do my 
statutes, and keep my judgments, 
and do them ; o and ye shall dwelt 
in the land in safety. 

19 And the land shall yield her 

k ch. 27. 18, 23. 1 ver. 14. m ygr. 43. ch. 
19. 14, 32. a ch. 19. 37. o ch. 26. 5. Deut. 
12. 10. Ps. 4. 8. Prov. 1. 33. Jer. 23. 6. 

than he would have the poor man re- 
quire more for it than its just value, 
computing to the time of the next jubi- 
lee. It seems to be a general injunction 
of equity, the particular application of 
which is shown in the verses imme- 
diately following. 

15. According to the number of years ^ 
&c. The purchases that were to be 
made of lands were to be regulated by 
the number of years which remained to 
the next jubilee. This was something 
like buying the unexpired term of a lease 
among us ; the purchase being always 
regulated by the number of years be- 
tween the time of purchase and the ex- 
piration of the term. It is easy to 
perceive that the nearer the jubilee was, 
the less would be the value of the land ; 
therefore it is said ; ^ According to the 
fewness of the years thou shalt diminish 
the price.' IT According to the num- 
ber of the years of the fruits. They 
were to reckon only the productive 
years, and therefore must discount for 
the sabbatical years. 

22* 



fruit, and pye shall eat your fill, 
and dwell therein in safety. 

20 And if ye shall say, qWhat 
shall we eat the seventh year ? 
behold, rwe shall not sow nor 
gather in our increase : 

21 Then I will s command my 
blessing upon you in the sixth year, 
and it shall bring forth fruit for 
three years. 

22 t And ye shall sow the eighth 
year, and eat yet of u old fruit until 
the ninth year; until her fruits 
come in ye shall eat of the old 
stoi^e^ 

23 il The land shall not be sold 
for ever; for x the land is mine, for 
ye are y strangers and sojourners 
with me. 

P ch. 26. 5. Ezek. 34. 25, 27, 28. q Matt. 
6. 25, 31. r ver. 4, 5. s Deut. 28. 8. See 
Exod. 16. 29. t 2 Kings 19. 29. u Josh. 5. 
11, 12. xDeut. 32. 43. 2 Chron. 7. 20. Ps. 
85. 1. Joel 2. 18, and 3. 2. y 1 Chron. 29. 
15. Ps. 39. 12, and 119. 19. 1 Pet. 2. 11. 

17. Thou Shalt fear thy God. This 
would be the great guaranty for the 
strict observance of the foregoing pre- 
cepts, as ' by the fear of the Lord men 
depart from iniquity.' 

Promises to Obedience. 

18. Ye shall dwell in the land in 
safety. Heb. HtDlli Idbeta^h, in confi- 
dent-safety. The Heb. word expresses 
both the boldness and confidence with 
which men that fear and obey God trust 
in him, and the safety and security 
which they feel in his protection in 
times of doubt or danger. 

Law of Redemption of Land. 
23. The land shall not be sold for 
ever. As the root of the original word 
here rendered ' for ever,' signifies to cut 
entirely off, the meaning in this case 
probably is that the land should not be 
sold in such a manner as to be entirely 
cut off from redemption ; i.e. wholly 
and absolutely alienated from the hand 
of the proprietor. This was forbidden 



253 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



24 And in all the land of your 
possession ye shall grant a redemp- 
tion for the land. 

25 IF z If thy brother be waxen 
poor, and hath sold away some of 
his possession, and if a any of his 
kin come to redeem it, then shall 
he redeem that which his brother 
sold. 

26 And if the man have none to 
redeem it, and himself be able to 
redeem it. 

z Ruth 2. 20, and 4. 4, 6. a See Ruth 3. 2, 



because as God, in a miraculous manner, 
gave them possession of this land, they 
Avere to consider themselves merely as 
tenants to him j and, therefore, he as 
the great landholder or lord of the soil, 
prescribes to them the conditions on 
which they shall hold it. 

24. Grant a redemption for the land. 
That is, the privilege of redemption , 
so that he who sold it, if he became 
able, or his kinsman or relations in case 
he died, might redeem it in the interim 
before the next jubilee ; but if it was 
not done before the year of jubilee, it 
was not then redeemed, but was re- 
stored gratis in virtue of the jubilee-law. 

25. If thy brother be waxen poor, &c. 
We learn from Maimonides that it was 
seldom that houses or lands were sold 
among the Jews till the year of jubilee, 
except from the pressure of poverty. 
For purposes of gainful traffic it was 
almost never done. When want and 
distress were the prompting cause, pro. 
vision was kindly made for their re- 
demption. IF If any of his kin come 

to redeem it. Heb. ^ The redeemer 
thereof, he that is near unto him, shall 
come and shall redeem.' The Heb. 

S# word for redeem Cp^^ soel) , is the term 
applied to the kinsman to whom per- 
tained the right, according to a very 
ancient usage, of redeeming lands, 
houses, or persons, and also of avenging 
the blood of one slain. The person 
sustaining this office was a lively figure 



27 Then b let him count the years 
of the sale thereof, and restore the 
overplus unto the man to whom 
he sold it; that he may return 
unto his possession. 

28 But if he be not able to restore 
it to him, then that which is sold 
shall remain in the hand of him 
that hath bought it until the year 
of jubilee: cand in the jubilee it 
shall go out, and he shall return 
unto his possession. 

b ver. 50, 51, 52. c yer. 13. 

of Christ, who, assumed our nature that 
he might become our kinsman-redeemer, 
bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh, 
and in reference to whom it is said. Is. 
59. 20, ' The redeemer shall come out 
of Zion.' He has by his sufferings and 
death bought back to man that inherit- 
ance which had been forfeited by sin. 

IT That which his brother sold. 

Heb. ^^tl^ 1i?3)3 mimkar a^hivj the 
sale of his brother, 

26. And himself be able to redeem it, 
Heb. ' His hand hath attained unto, and 
he hath found the sufficiency of the re- 
demption j' i. e. the requisite means of 
making the redemption. This is con- 
strued, however, by the Rabbinical wri- 
ters to imply that he must have grown 
able from his own means to re-purchase 
the property, and that he was not to do 
it by borrowing. 

27. Then let him county &c. That 
is, let him count the years from the 
time the sale was made unto the next 
ensuing jubilee ; computing the income 
for the years that remain, and paying 
for them at the original rate agreed 
upon at the time of sale. If, for in- 
stance, one sold a field to another ten 
years before a jubilee, and at the end 
of five years wished to redeem it, he 
paid the purchaser half the price at 
which he bought it ; and so on in that 
proportion, according to the time. A 
fair estimate was to be made of the 
probable proceeds of the land during 



I 



I 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXV. 



259 



29 And if a man sell a dwelling- 
house in a walled city, then he 
may redeem it within a whole 
year after it is sold : ivithin a full 
year may he redeem it. 

30 And if it be not redeemed 
within the space of a full year, 
then the house that is in the walled 
city shall be established for ever 
to him that bought it, throughout 
his generations: it shall not go out 
in the jubilee. 

31 But the houses of the villages 
which have no walls round about 
them, shall be counted as the fields 
of the country : they may be re- 
deemed, and they shall go out in 
the jubilee. 

32 Notwithstanding dthe cities 
of the Levites, and the houses of 

d See Numb. 35. 2. Josh. 21. 2, &c. 

the interval to the jubilee, and this was 
to be allowed to the buyer. This is 
termed ' restoring the overplus.' 
The Difference in the terms of Redemp- 
tion in respect to City and Country 
Houses. 

29. If a man sell a dwelling-house in 
a walled city, Heb. n?2in 1"^^ ir 
'homah, a city of wall. Houses in wall- 
ed cities were more the fruit of their 
own industry than land in the country, 
which was the immediate gift of God ; 
and, therefore, if a man sold a house in 
a city, he might redeem it any time 
within a year after the date, but other- 
wise it was confirmed to the purchaser 
for ever, and should no more return to 
the original proprietor, not even in the 
year of jubilee. This provision was 
made to encourage strangers and prose- 
lytes to come and settle among them. 
Though they could not purchase land 
in Canaan for themselves and their 
heirs, yet they might purchase houses 
in walled cities, which would be most 
convenient for them who were sup- 
posed to live by trade. But country 
villages could be disposed of no other- 
wise than as lands might. 



the cities of their possession, may 
the Levites redeem at any time. 

33 And if a man purchase of the 
Levites, then the house that was 
sold, and the city of his possession 
e shall go out in the year of jubilee ; 
for the houses of the cities of the 
Levites are their possession among 
the children of Israel. 

34 But f the field of the suburbs 
of their cities may not be sold, for 
it is their perpetual possession. 

35 If And if thy brother be waxen 
poor, and fallen in decay with thee ; 
then thou shalt s relieve him : yea, 
though he be a stranger, or a so- 
journer; that he may live with 
thee. 

e ver. 28. f See Acts 4. 36, 37. S Dent. 
15. 7, 8. Ps. 37. 26, and 41. 1, and 112. 5, 9. 
Prov. 14. 31. Luke 6. 35. Acts 11. 29. 
Rom. 12. IS. 1 John 3. 17. 

Exception in favor of the Levites. 

32. Notwithstanding the cities of the 
Levitesj &c. This was doubtless be- 
cause the Levites had no other posses- 
sions than the forty-eight cities with 
their suburbs which were assigned 
them, and God " would show that the 
Levites were his peculiar care ; and it 
was for the interest of the public that 
they should not be impoverished or de- 
prived of their possessions. Therefore 
as their houses in these cities were the 
whole of what they could call their own^ 
they could not be utterly alienated. 

Compassion to be had of the Poor. 
35. Fallen in decay. Heb. IT^ TO^a 
mdtah yddo, his hand wavereth. Gr. 
aSwaTrjat} raig X^P^'-^ avrov^ is weak in 
his hands. That is, disabled from help- 
ing himself; one Avho was unable to 
help himself, as if his hand were shak- 

ing with the palsy. IT Thou shalt 

relieve him. Heb. in nptntl he^hezakta 
6o, thou shalt strengthen him. That is, 
thou shalt extend to him relief, which is 
otherwise expressed by holding or 
strengthening the hands of the weak 
and needy. IT That he may live with 



260 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



36 h Take thou no usury of him, 
or increase; but ifear thy God; 
that thy brother may live with thee. 

37 Thou shalt not give him thy 
money upon usury, nor lend him 
thy victuals for increase. 

38 k I am the Lord your God, 
which brought you forth out of the 
land of Egypt, to give you the land 
of Canaan, and to be your God. 

39 H And 1 if thy brother that 

h Exod. 22. 25. Deut. 23. 19. Neh. 5. 7. 
Ps. 15. 5. Prov. 2S. 8. Ezek. IS. 8, 13, 17, 
and 22. 12. i ver. 17. Neh. 6. 9. k ch. 22. 
32, 33. 1 Exod. 21. 2. Deut. 15. 12. 1 
Kings 9. 22. 2 Kings 4. 1. Neh. 6. 5. Jer. 
34. 14. 

thee ; i. e. that he may be enabled to 
recover himself out of his calamities 
and live prosperously among you. 
' Life ' in the Scriptures is often used in 
opposition to sickness, distress, calam- 
ity, as Isai. 38. 9, '■ The writing of Hez- 
ekiah king of Judah, when he had been 
sick, and was recovered^ (Heb. was 
made alive) of his sickness.' Neh. 4. 
2, ' Will they revive (Heb. make alive) 
the stones out of the heaps of the rub- 
bish which are burned V 1 Chron. 11.8, 
' And Joab repaired (Heb. made alive) 
the rest of the city.' Gen. 45. 27, ' And 
the spirit of Jacob their father revived^ 
(Heb. was made alive).'' 

36. Take thou no usury of him. The 
original term 'IID^ neshek comes from 
the verb "TIDD nashaky to bite, mostly 
applied to the bite of a serpent, and 
properly signifies biting usury, so 
called perhaps because it resembles the 
bite of a serpent ; for as this is often 
so small as to be scarcely perceptible 
at first, but the venom soon spreads and 
difiuses itself, till it reaches the vitals, 
so the increase of usury, which at first 
is not perceived, at length grows so 
much as to devour a man's substance. 
As this law was ordained merely to 
prevent cruel exactions, it cannot be 
considered as applying to that reason- 
able compensation for the use of money 
which is known among us by the appel- 



dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, 
and be sold unto thee ; thou shalt ^ 
not compel him to serve as a bond- * 
servant : 

40 But as an hired servant, and 
as a sojourner he shall be with 
thee, and shall serve thee unto the 
year of jubilee : 

41 And then shall he depart from 
thee, both he and his children 
mwith him, and shall return unto 
his own family, and ^lunto the 
possession of his fathers shall he 
return. 

m Exod. 21. 3. n ver. 28. 



lation of simple interest. See Note on 
Ex. 22. 25. 

An Israelite not to be obliged to serve as 
a Slave. 
39. And be sold unto thee. Persons 
were sometimes sold among the Jews 
by judicial process when they had been 
guilty of theft, and were not able to 
make satisfaction, Ex. 21. 2. Some 
were sold by their parents ; i. e. they 
disposed of their I'ight of service for a 
stipulated sum, and for a number of 
years. Others, again, when reduced to 
extreme want, sold themselves, as we 
have explained more at large, Ex. 21.2. 
The Jewish writers inform us that this 
was not considered lawful except in 
extreme cases. ^ A man might not sell 
himself to lay up the money which was 
given for him ; nor to buy goods j nor 
to pay his debts, but merely that he 
might get bread to eat. Neither was it 
lawful for him to sell himself as long 
as he had so much as a garment left.' — 
Maimonides. IT Thou shalt not com- 
pel him to serve as a bond servant. That 
is, it must not be supposed that his 
master that bought him had as absolute 
a property in him as in a captive taken 
in war, who might be used, sold, and 
bequeathed, at pleasure, as much as a 
man's cattle ; but he shall serve thee 
merely as a hired servant whose ser- 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXV. 



261 



42 For they are omy servants 
which I brought forth out of the 
land of Egypt; they shall not be 
sold as bond-men. 

43 p Thou shalt not rule over 
him q with rigour, but r shalt fear 
thy God. 

44 Both thy bond-men and thy 
bond-maids, which thou shalt have, 
shall he of the heathen that are 
round about you ; of them shall ye 
buy bond-men and bond-maids. 

o ver. 55. Rom. 6. 22. 1 Cor. 7. 23. 

P Ephes. 6. 9. Col. 4. 1. q ver. 46. Exod. 

1. 13. rver. 17. Exod. 1. 17, 21. Deut. 
25. 18. Mai. 3. 5. 

vices the master may command, with- 
out pretending to a despotic power over 
his person. 

42. They shall not he sold as bond- 
men. That is, not in the open public 
manner that other servants or slaves 
were sold ; not, as it were, in the mar- 
ket place ; but privately and in a more 
honorable way. But the spirit of the 
passage, as connected with the next 
verse, seems to be, that he should not 
be taken as a mere slave, but as a hired 
servant, or as a brother fallen into ad- 
versity, and treated as an Israelite fear- 
ing God would desire a brother Israel- 
ite to treat himself in the same circum- 
stances. 

43. Thou shalt not rule over him with 
rigor. Heb. "Il^ll hepharekj with 
fierceness. See the term explained in 
the Note on Ex. 1. 13, where it is ap- 
plied to the cruelty of Pharaoh's task 
masters. Gr. * Thou shalt not rack nor 
afflict them with labors.' But though 
forbidden thus to tyrannise over their 
own countrymen, were they permitted 
to treat their heathen bondmen with 
rigor ? On this the Hebrew writers say, 
^ It is lawful to make a Canaanitish 
servant serve with rigor, but notwith- 
standing this right, it is the property 
of mercy and way of wisdom that a 
man should be compassionate, and fol- 
low justice, and not make his yoke 
heavy upon his servant nor afflict him.' 



45 Moreover, of 3 the children of 
the strangers that do sojourn among 
you, of them shall ye buy, and of 
their families that are with you, 
which they begat in your land : 
and they shall be your possession. 

46 And tye shall take them as 
an inheritance for your children 
after you, to inherit ihem for a 
possession, they shall be your bond- 
men for ever : but over your breth- 
ren the children of Israel, ^ye shall 
not rule one over another with 
rigour. 

s Isai. 5Q. 3, 6. t Isai. 14. 2. u ver. 43. 



' Labor beyond the person's strength, 
or labor too long continued, or in un- 
healthy or uncomfortable places and 
circumstances, or without sufficient 
food, &c. is labor exacted with rigor, 
and consequently inhuman, and so at 
variance not only with the spirit of the 
Mosaic dispensation, but with the max- 
ims of right conduct among every peo- 
ple under heaven.' — A. Clarke. 

44. Shall be of the heathen that are 
round about you. That is, of the hea- 
then inhabiting the countries round 
about the Holy Land, but not of the 
Canaanites, whom they were required 

to destroy. IF Of them shall ye buy 

bond-men and bond-maids, Heb. 1!3pn 
tiknu, shall ye obtain ^ acquire j whether 
by purchase or otherwise. We have 
already observed, in the full explana- 
tion of this term, Ex. 21. 2, that its 
general import is that of acquisition^ 
without specifying the mode. It is not 
improbable that heathen bond-men were 
occasionally bought by the Israelites, 
but the precept has doubtless a primary 
reference to such as were taken cap- 
tives in war ; whence the Latin name 
mancipia is supposed to be equivalent 
to manu capti, captured by the hand, 
and servuSy slave, to be applied to one 
who was preserved alive when he might 
otherwise have been killed. The rule 
permitted them also to obtain by pur- 
chase the children of resident foreign 



262 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



47 If And if a sojourner or a 
stranger wax rich by thee, and 
xthy brother that dioelleth by him 
wax poor, and sell himself unto 
the stranger or sojourner by thee, 
or to the stock of the stranger's 
family : 

48 After that he is sold he may 
be redeemed again ; one of his 
brethren may y redeem him : 

49 Either his uncle, or his uncle's 
son may redeem him, or any that 
is nigh of kin unto him of his fam- 

X ver. 25. 35, y Neh. 5. 5. z ver. 26. 

ers among them, who, though they 
might be proselytes of the gate, yet 
were not circumcised ; and whom the 
Chal. therefore denominates * uncir- 
cumcised sojourners.' 

Of the Redemption of the Israelitish 
Bond-man from the hand of the So- 
journer. 

47. Sell himself unto the stranger. 
It will be well, in reference to the laws 
concerning slavery in this chapter, to 
recollect that Moses is not originating 
laws to give a sanction to slavery, but 
is interposing, under the divine com- 
mand, to regulate for the better a sys- 
tem already in operation. We discover 
the existence of slavery in the book of 
Genesis, and are aware of its early pre- 
valence in all countries. Those who 
are acquainted wuth the condition of 
slaves in ancient nations will not fail 
to recognise the wisdom and mercy of 
the various regulations on the subject 
which are given here and elsewhere, 
and which, when carefully considered, 
will be found in all instances to have 
an obvious tendency to protect a bond- 
man, and to ameliorate his condition, 
whether a native or a foreigner. The 
law of the present chapter is so clearly 
announced as to require no particular 
exposition. On the above-cited verse 
we may however observe, that foreign- 
ers among the Jews seem to have been 
in a much more privileged condition 



ily may redeem him ; or if z he be 
able, he may redeem himself. 

50 And he shall reckon with him 
that bought him, from the year that 
he was sold to him, unto the year 
of jubilee : and the price of his 
sale shall be according unto the 
number of years, a according to the 
time of an hired servant shall it 
be with him. 

51 If there be yet many years be- 
hind, accordin g unto them he shall 
give again the price of his redemp- 

a Job 7. 1. Isai. 16. 14, and 21. 16. 

than they are at present in the same or 
any Mohammedan country. We see 
that a resident foreigner is allowed to 
purchase any Hebrew whose distressed 
circumstances make him wish to sell 
his liberty. At present no Christian or 
Jew in a Mohammedan country is al- 
lowed to have as a slave, we will not 
say any native, but any Mohammedan 
of any country — nor, indeed, any other 
than Mohammedans, except negroes— 
who are the only description of slaves 
they may possess.' — Pict. Bib. 

50. And he shall reckon, &c. In or- 
der that no injustice might be done to 
the master, they were to compute how 
long the bond-man had served him, how 
long he had still to serve, and what 
price was paid for him ; and then, ac- 
cording to the number of years elapsed, 
and the number to come, the right sum 
was made out. The Jews held, that 
the kindred of such a person were bound, 
if in their power, to redeem him, lest 
he should be swallowed up among the 
heathen ; and we find from Neh. 5. 8, 
that this was done by the Jews on their 
return from the Babylonish captivity ; 
^ We, after our ability, have redeemed 
our brethren the Jews, who were sold 

unto the heathen.' IT According to 

the time of a hired servant shall it be 
with him. That is, according to the 
rate of wages ordinarily allowed to a 
hired servant for the like period of time 
shall the sum paid for him be estimated. 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



263 



tion out of the money that he was 
bought for. 

52 And if there remain but few 
years unto the year of jubilee, then 
he shall count with him, and ac- 
cording unto his years shall he 
give him again the price of his 
redemption. 

53 And as a yearly hired servant 
shall he be with him : and the 
other shall not rule with rigour 
over him in thy sight. 

54 And if he be not redeemed in 
these years^ then ^ he shall go out 

bver. 41. Exod. 21. 2, 3. 

53. Shalt not rule with rigor over 
him in thy sight. That is, with thy 
connivance. Thou, an Israelite, shalt 
not knowingly suffer a stranger to mal- 
treat or abuse one of their own brethren. 
It shall be the duty of the magistrates, 
upon information, to call such an one 
to account. 

54. If he be not redeemed in those 
years. Heb. n^i^^ betllehj in or by 
these. As there is no substantive in the 
original, it is somewhat doubtful what 
word is to be supplied. The Gr. has 
icara ravra, by these things or means, 
i. e. neither by himself or others before 
the jubilee. 

55. For unto me the children of Israel 
are servants. The original term is the 
same that has hitherto all along been 
rendered ^ bond-men ;' and the force of 
the intended contrast would have been 
stronger, had that word been retained. 
Let the children of Israel be dealt with 
as I have commanded, for they are my 
bond-men in a far higher sense than 
they are or can be those of any other. 



CHAPTER XXVI. 

The present chapter may be said to 
be a solemn practical conclusion to the 
main body of the Levitical law, con- 
taining a general enforcement of all its 
precepts by promises of reward in case 



in the year of jubilee, both he, and 
his children with him. 

DO For c unto me the children of 
Israel are servants, they are my 
servants whom I brought forth out 
of the laud of Egypt: I am the 
Lord your God. 

CHAPTER XXVI. 

YE shall make you a no idols nor 
graven image, neither rear 
you up a standing image, neither 
shall ye set up any image of stone 
in your land, to bow down unto it: 
for I am the Lord your God. 

c ver. 42. a Exod. 20. 4, 5. Deut. 5. S, 
and 16. 22, and 27. 15. Ps. 97. 7. 

of obedience on the one hand, and 
threatenings of punishment in case of 
disobedience on the other. 

Idolatry forbidden. 
1. Ye shall make you no idols. Heb. 
tDi)^i)i< elelim, nothings, vanities. Gr. 
Xt:ipo7roir]Ta, thiiigs made with hands. 
It is a term expressive of the utmost 
possible contempt towards the objects 
intended, and the prohibition comes ia 
very properly in this place, at the head 
of these solemn injunctions, idolatry 
being the grand crov/ning sin which they 
were most studiously to avoid. For a 
farther explication of the word, see on 

Lev. 19. 4. ^nr Nor graven image. 

Heb. 5d5 pesel, i. e. any thing hewed 
or sculptured out of wood or stone. 

I See Note on on Ex. 20. 4. U Stand* 

: ing image. Heb. {1^!^;^ w.atzebah,pil- 
: lar or statue ; i. e. either a single stone, 
I or a pile of stones reared and conse- 
I crated to reUgious purposes. Probably 
i the stones or pillars which were at 
first set up and anointed by holy men 
in commemoration of signal interposi- 
tions of God in their behalf, were after- 
wards abused to idolatrous and super- 
stitious purposes, and therefore are for- 
bidden. IT Image of stone. Heb. 

Ti'^-IL"^ '^ii^ eben masJdthj stone of 
imagery^ or stone of picture or figure j 
i. e. stones curiously wrought and 



264: 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 149] 



2 H b Ye shall keep my sabbaths, 
and reverence my sanctuary : I am 
the Lord. 

carved with figures in rehef, which 
were often made use of as objects of 
adoration among the ancient heathen. 
Chal. * Stone of worship.' ' In Ezek. 8. 
8-11, there is a description of a subter- 
raneous vault, the walls of which were 
covered with images of quadrupeds and 
creeping things, exactly like those of 
Egypt which are covered with hiero- 
glyphic figures. In the 12th verse this 
vault is called rT^^^^ ^^il hadaj' mas- 
kith, which our translation excellently 
renders ' chambers of imagery.' Now 
the same word being used in two places 
with an analogous context, it is fair to 
infer, that if an hieroglyphic cave is 
intended in Ezekiel, an hieroglyphic 
stone is intended here 5 which is the 
more probable when we recollect that 
the Israelites were at this time fresh 
from Egypt, and deeply infected with 
the rank idolatries of that country — 
insomuch that whenever Moses inter- 
dicts, at this early period, a particular 
form of idolatry, we should invariably 
feel disposed to look to Egypt, in the 
first instance, for the example. It is 
well known that the Egyptian priests, 
in order to preserve the treasures of 
knowledge and their discoveries in 
natural science, and at the same time to 
render them inscrutable to any but the 
initiated few, made use not of common 
wn'iting but of hieroglyphics, with 
which they inscribed obelisks, walls, 
and even subterraneous chambers and 
galleries, as well as square stones. 
These monuments were deified by the 
multitude, who worshipped in them 
Thoth, the Egyptian god of learning. 
This was a sufficient reason for their 
interdiction by Moses. But had he no 
further reason ? As this law, if it be 
thus rightly understood, would operate 
to the exclusion of hieroglyphics, are 
we not at liberty to infer that Moses — 
or rather his Divine instructor — thus 



3 If c If ye walk in my statutes 

b ch. 19. 30. c Deut. 11. 13, 14, 15, and 
28. 1-14. 

expressed his abhorrence of a practice 
which locked up knowledge to the peo- 
ple for the purpose of enabling the priv- 
ileged few, by virtue of that power 
which knowledge gives, to hold in en- 
tire thraldom their minds, bodies, and 
estates ? Michaelis, whose view of this 
text we have followed, well observes, 
' Had Moses been only a wise and be- 
nevolent impostor ,* had he given him- 
self out for a divine messenger, without 
being so, and merely fram love to an 
oppressed people ; and had his miracles 
been nothing more than human devices ; 
it is scarcely conceivable how he could 
ever have gone the length ol' abolishing 
an expedient so artfully contrived, and 
so favorable to the views of priestcraft, 
for the concealment of the sciences. 
The legislator, therefore, who relin- 
quished such an expedient, and at the 
same time founded his polity on the 
commandments of a Deity, could be no 
impostor, but must have been an honest 
man." — Pict. Bib. 

The Sabbath and the Sanctuary to be 
Sanctified. 
2. Ye shall keep my sabbaths. That 
is, my different days of sabbatical rest ; J 
not only the sabbath day, but other 1 
stated solemnities, which were to be dis- 
tinguished by holy convocations. Next 
in importance to the charge concerning 
idolatry is that respecting the due ob- 
servance of the sabbath ; and we ac- 
cordingly find in the prophets, that 
next to that of idolatry, there is no sin 
for which the Jews are more frequently 
reproved and threatened, than the pro- 
fanation of God's holy sabbaths. The 
reverence of the sanctuary here en- 
joined is connected with the keeping of 
the Sabbath by a tie of intimacy too 
obvious to need remark. 

Promises to Obedience. 
3. If ye walk in my statutes^ &c. 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



265 



and keep my commandments, and 
do them ; 

4 ti Then I will give you rain in 
due season, eand the land shall 
yield her increase, and the trees 
of the field shall yield their fruit : 

5 And f your threshing shall reach 
unto the vintage, and the vintage 
shall reach unto the sowing-time ; 
and gye shall eat your bread to 
the full, and indwell in your land 
safely. 

d Isai. 30. 23. Ezek. 34. 26. Joel 2. 23, 24. 
ePs. 67. 6, and 85. 12. Ezek. 34. 27, and 36. 
30. Zech. 8. 12. f Amos 9. 13. g ch. 25. 19. 
Deut. 11. 15. Joel 2. 19, 26. h ch. 25. 18. 
Job 11. 18. Ezek. 34. 25, 27, 28. i 1 Chron. 
22. 9, Ps. 29. 11, and 147. 14. Isai. 45. 7. 
Hag. 2. 9. 



The promises and threatenings which 
follo^l' are of a temporal nature ; and it 
has been questioned whether they ex- 
tend to individuals, or are to be limited 
to the Israelites as a nation. But the 
happiness and prosperity of a nation 
necessarily involves that of individuals ; 
and though individuals might not be 
uniformly rewarded or punished accord- 
ing to their obedience or disobedience, 
yet the temporal retribution announced 
was sufficiently uniform to evince the 
particular providence which guided the 
people of Israel. 

4. Then will I give you rain. Heb. 
tSw^^lII^^ ^int\'2 nathatti gishvL'ekem, will 
give your rains. So certain should be 
their show^ers in their seasons, so infal- 
libly secured by promise, that they 
should be entitled to consider and call 
them theirs; ' I will gi've your rains.' 

5. Your threshing shall reach unto 
the vintage. That is, so abundant shall 
be your corn-crops that the business of 
threshing shall not be completed before 
the vintage ; and again, so plentiful 
shall be the produce of the vine, that ye 
shall not be able to finish the gathering 
and pressing of your grapes till sowing 
time again arrives. We meet with a 
similar sentiment in the prophet Amos, 
ch. 9. 13, ' The plowman shall overtake | 

23 



6 And il will give peace in the 
land, and kye shall he down, and 
none shall make you afraid : and I 
will rid 1 evil beasts out of the land, 
neither shall m the sword go 
through your land. 

7 And ye shall chase your ene- 
mies, and they shall fall before you 
by the sword. 

8 And n five of you shall chase an 
hundred, and an hundred of you 
shall put ten thousand to flight: 
and your enemies shall fall before 
you by the sword. 

k Job 11. 19. Ps. 3. 5, and 4. 8. Isai. 35. 
9. Jer. 30. 10. Ezek. 34. 25. Hos. 2. 18. 
Zeph. 3. 13. I 2 Kings 17. 25. Ezek, 5. 17, 
and 14. 15. m Ezek. 14. 17. nDeut. 32. 30. 
Josh. 23. 10. 

the reaper, and the treader of grapes 
him who soweth seed.' 

6. I will give peace in your land. 
Freedom from intestine commotions 
and insurrections, which often arise 
from poverty and discontent. The lan- 
guage seems rather to refer to peace 
among themselves, while the 'sword' 
in the latter clause of the verse points 
rather to the ravages of war from for- 
eign invasion. The blessings here 
promised, it will be noticed, are set in 
contrast with the main judgments which 
are elsewhere denounced against the 
Israelites, Ezek. 14. 21, to wit, famine, 
war, and evil beasts. See also Note 
on V. 21. 

7. Ye shall chase your enemies, &c. 
That is, a few, a mere handful, shall be 
more than a match for a great multi- 
tude, as it proved in the conquest of 
Canaan ; insomuch that Joshua says, 
enlarging upon this promise. Josh. 23. 10, 
' One man of you shall chase a thou- 
sand.' This was signally fulfilled in 
the days of Gideon who with three men 
put to flight a vast army, Judg. 7. 22. 
So also in the case of David's worthies, ' 
of whom one lifted his spear against 
eight hundred, and slew three hundred 
at one time, 2 Sam. 23. 8, 18, 1 Chron. 
11. 11. Three men also broke through 



266 



LEVITICUS 



[B. 



9 For I will o have respect unto 
you, and p make you fruitful, and 
multiply you, and establish my 
covenant with you. 

10 And ye shall eat q old store, 
and bring forth the old because of 
the new. 

11 r And I will set my tabernacle 
among you : and my soul shall not 
s abhor you. 

o Exod. 2. 25. 2 Kings 13. 23. P Gen. 17. 
6, 7. Neh. 9. 23. Ps. 107. 38. q ch. 26. 32. 
r Exod. 25. 8, and 29. 45. Josh. 22. 19. Ps. 
76. 2. Ezek. 37. 26, 27, 28. Rev. 21. 3. 
s ch. 20. 23. Deut. 32. 19. 

the host of the Philistines, 1 Chron. 
11. 18. Comp. Deut. 32.30. 

9. For I will have respect unto you. 
Heb. t^'^i)!^ '^!n'^3& panithi alekenij I 
will turn my face unto you, Gr. 
£Tri0\cipci) E(p' 'vjLtaj Kai av^avd 'vfxag, 
I will look upon you and bless you. 
Chal. ' I will have respect by my 
Word to do good unto you.' For this 
favor David prays, Ps.25. 16, and 69. 17, 
and when God had delivered Israel 
from their enemies, it is said, 2 Kings 
13. 23, ' The Lord was gracious unto 
them, and had respect unto them^ be- 
cause of his covenant.' IT Establish 

my covenant with you. That is, invio- 
lably keep my covenant already esta- 
blished, and faithfully perform its every 
stipulation. 

10. Ye shall eat old store^ &c. That 
is, to prevent waste from superabun- 
dance, ye shall eat of your old stock of 
provisions, notwithstanding the new- 
crop has come in. IT Bring forth 

the old because of the new. That is, ye 
shall be forced to 'bring forth,' or re- 
move from your barns and garners, the 
old stock of your corn, in order to make 
room for the new. 

11. And I unll set my tabernacle 
among you. That is, I will firmly and 
permanently establish my tabernacle 
among you; I will secure its contin- 
uance with you. In addition to this, its 
primary sense, the passage contains in 
effect the grand promise of the Gospel 



C. 1491. 

12 t And I will walk among you, 
and uwill be your God, and ye 
shall be my people. 

13 wl am the Lord your God, 
which brought you forth out of 
the land of Egypt, that ye should 
not be their bond-men, xandl have 
broken the bands of your yoke, and 
made you go upright. 



t 2 Cor. 6. 16. u Exod. 6. 7. Jer. 7. 23, 
and 11. 4, and 30. 22. Ezek. 11. 20, and 36. 
28. w ch. 25, 38, 42, 55. x Jer. 2. 20. 
Ezek. 34. 27. 



dispensation, viz. : the presence, man- 
ifestation, and in-dwelling of God in 
human nature. So John 1. 14, * The 
Word was made flesh and dwelt among 
us. Gr. 'Ta^ernacZed among us.' Jesus 
Christ was the true tabernacle of God, 
and though this promise was in an emi- 
nent manner fulfilled in the Savior's in- 
habitation of our nature while accom- 
plishing his work on earth, yet it ap- 
pears from Rev. 21. 3, that we are to 
look for its fulfilment in a still higher 
sense at some future period of this 
world's history: 'And I heard a great 
voice out of heaven saying. Behold, 
the tabernacle of God is with men, and 
he will dwell with them.' See Note on 
Ex. 29. 45, where this promise is largely 
considered. IT My soul shall not ab- 
hor you. I will regard you with tokens 
of the utmost complacency ; I will take 
delight in you, and impart the inward 
peace of my spirit. The contrary of 
this is threatened, v. 30. 

12. And I will walk among you. Chal. 
' I will cause my Shekinah to dwell 
among you.' I will be familiarly con- 
versant among you by the visible sym- 
bol of my presence, conducting your 
journeys in the wilderness, and abiding 
in the tabernacle and temple prepared 
for me. 

13. And made you go upright. That 
is, set you free from bondage j brought 
you into that state of enlargement in 
which you are no more bowed down by 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



267 



14 H y But if you will not hearken 
unto me, and will not do all these 
commandments ; 

15 And if ye shall z despise my 
statutes, or if your soul abhor my 
judgments, so that ye will not do 
all my commandments, hut that 
ye break my covenant : 

16 I also will do this unto you, I 
will even appoint over you a ter- 
ror, b consumption, and the burning 
ague, that shall c consume the eyes, 
and cause sorrow of heart : and 
d ye shall sow your seed in vain : 
for your enemies shall eat it. 

y Deut. 23. 15. Lam. 2. 17. Mai. 2. 2. 
z ver. 43. 2 Kings 17. 15. a Deut. 23. 65, 
66, 67, and 32. 25. Jer. 15. S. b Deut. 23. 
22. c 1 Sam. 2. 33. d Deut. 28. 33, 51. Job 
31. S. Jer. 5. 17, and 12. 13. Mic. 6. 15. 



the heavy burdens laid upon your backs, 
nor hanging down your heads in despon- 
dency and woe. 

Threatenings denounced against Diso- 
bedience. 

14. If ye will not hearken to me. Gr. 
sav 6s fjLT] VTiaKovar]T£ [jlov, if ye will not 
obey me. This is one of the most fre- 
quent uses of the original word for 
* hear ' or ' hearken.^ Chal. ' If ye will 
not receive my word.' So in v. 18. 
The subsequent history of the Jewish 
race affords the most conclusive evi^ 
dence that these predictions were ful- 
filled with a fearful exactness. The 
limits of our annotations do not permit 
us to go into minute detail, but the 
volumes of Newton and Keith will pre- 
sent a mass of proof on this score which 
will be found to be of intense interest, 
and such as the most determined skep- 
tic will endeavor in vain to gainsay. 

16. I will even appoint over you 
terror^ &c. Heb. G^D^ii^ '^mpSH 
hiphkadti alekem, will visit upon you. 
At the same time, there is very good 
authority for interpreting the verb as is 
done in our translation, in the sense of 
setting over, constituting guardians of, 
investing with authority. The true 



17 And e I will set my face against 
you, and f ye shall be slain before 
your enemies; sthey that hate 
you shall reign over you, and ^ ye 
shall flee when none pursueth you. 

18 And if ye will not yet for all 
this hearken unto me, then I will 
punish you i seven times more for 
your sins. 

19 And I will k break the pride 
of your power; and I iwill make 
your heaven as iron, and your 
earth as brass : 

20 And your m strength shall be 

e ch. 17. 10. f Deut. 28. 25. Judg. 2. 14. 
Jer. 19. 7. S Ps. 106. 41. h ver. 36. Ps. 
53. 5. Prov. 23. 1. i 1 Sam. 2. 5. Ps. 119. 
164. Prov. 24. 16. ^ Isai. 25. 11, and 26. 5. 
Ezek. 7. 24, and 30. 6, 1 Deut. 28. 23. 
m Ps. 127. 1. Isai. 49. 4. 

force of the term in this form is to cause 
to preside over, and Ps. 109. 6, affords a 
strikingly parallel example ; ' Set thou 
a wicked man over him (^p&Jl haph- 
ktd) , &c.' The language thus construed 
is singularly bold and striking. Terror, 
consumption, and the burning ague are 
personified, and made the keepers of the 
disobedient and apostate Israelites. 
They haunt their steps wherever they 
go, and keep them continually under 
the influence of dismay, feeling indis- 
cribable evils, and fearing worse. 

18. Then will I punish you seven 
times more for your sins. A definite 
for an indefinite number, according to 
common usage. The import is plainly 
that of a great increase of their plagues. 
These, by reason of their continued pro- 
vocations, were to become more and 
more aggravated from age to age, as 
history proves to have been the case. 
The words contain no allusion to a pe- 
riod of time, but simply to the degree 
of their punishment. 

19. J will make your heaven as iron 
and your earth as brass. That is, that 
part of the heavens which is over your 
country shall afford no more rain than 
if it were a canopy of iron, and conse- 
quently your earth or land shall be as 



268 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. a 149L 



spent in vain : for » your land shall 
not yield her increase, neither 
shall the trees of the land yield 
iheir fruits. 

21 H And if ye walk contrary 
unto me, and will not hearken unto 
me, I will bring seven times more 
plagues upon you according to 
your sins. 

22 o I will also send wild beasts 
among you, which shall rob you 
of your children, and destroy your 
cattle, and make you few in num- 
ber, and p your high-wsLys shall be 
desolate. 

23 And if ye q will not be re- 

nDeut. 11. 17, and 28. 18. Hag. 1. 10. 

Deut. 32. 24. 2 Kings 17. 25. Ezek. 5. 17, 
and 14. 15. P Judg. 5. 6. 2 Chron. 15. 5. 
Isai. 33. 8. Lam. 1. 4, Zech. 7. 14. q Jer. 
2. 30, and 5. 3. Amos 4. 6-12. 

barren of fruit as though the soil were 
brass. 

21. If ye walk contrary unto me. 
Heb. ^^p kerif a term of doubtful im- 
port, as appears from the marginal read- 
ing of our version, ^ at all adventures 
with me }' i. e. heedlessly, indifferently, 
reckless of consequences. This sense 
is adopted by the Hebrew writers, 
though the Gr. and the Chal. give that 
of ' contrariety,' and Gesenius and other 
lexicographers define it by ' hostile en- 
counter,' or ' going counter' to any one. 

22. I will send wild beasts among 
you. A reference to the following pas- 
sages will show the literal fulfilment, 
in repeated instances, of this prediction : 

1 Kings 13. 24,-20. 36. 2 Kings 2. 24, 
—17. 25, 26. Comp. Jer. 2. 15,-4. 7,— 

8. 17,-15. 3,— Ezek. 5. 17. M Your 

high-ways shall be desolate. For the 
truth of this see Judg. 5. 6, 2 Chron. 
15. 5, Is. 33. 8. 

24. Will punish you yet seven times 
for your sins. With seven-fold greater 
severity. 

25. That shall avenge the quarrel of 
my covenant. That shall execute ven- 
geance for the violation of my covenant. 



formed by me by these things, but 
will walk contrary unto me; 

24 r Then will I also walk con- 
trary unto you, and will punish 
you yet seven times for your sins. 

25 And 9 1 will bring a sword 
upon you, that shall avenge the 
quarrel of mi/ covenant : and when 
ye are gathered together within 
your cities, tj will send the pesti- 
lence among you : and ye shall be 
delivered into the hand of the 
enemy. 

26 11 And when I have broken the 
staff of your bread, ten women shall 
bake your bread in one oven, and 

r 2 Sam. 22. 27. Ps. 18. 26. s Ezek. 6. 17, 
and 6. 3, and 14. 17, and 29. 8, and 33. 2. 
t Numb. 14. 12. Deut. 28. 21. Jer. 14. 12, | 
and 24. 10, and 29. 17, 18. Amos 4. 10. u Pg. ^ 
105. 16. Isai. 3. 1. Ezek. 4. 16, and 5. 16, 
and 14. 13. 

Chal. ' That shall avenge on you the * 
vengeance for that ye have transgressed 
against the words of the law.' So in 
Jer. 50. 28, mention is made of the ' ven- 
geance of the Lord's temple,' by which 
is meant the punishment of the Baby- 
lonians for robbing and burning the 

temple. ^ I will send the pestilence 

among you. Gr. Oavaros, the death. 
Chal. id. See Note on Ex. 5. 3. It 
implies the cutting off by death of man 
and beast. See Ezek. 14. 19, 21. 

26. Ten women shall bake your bread 
in one oven. That is, there shall be 
such a scarcity of bread that one ordi- 
nary oven shall answer for the baking 
of ten, that is a great many families, 
whereas in common circumstances one 
oven would serve for one family. The 
editor of the Pict. Bible gives some- 
what of a different turn to the expres- 
sion. *In the note to chap. 2. 4, we 
remarked that in the East it was a gen- 
eral custom for families to bake their 
own bread in the sort of ovens which 
we there described. The performance 
of this duty always falls to the lot of 
the women. These ovens are, as we 
have seen, small, and only suited to the 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



269 



they shall deliver you your bread 
again by weight : and ^ ye shall 
eat and not be satisfied. 

27 And y if ye will not for all this 
hearken unto me, but walk con- 
trary unto me ; 

28 Then I will walk contrary 
unto you also ^in fury ; and I, even 
I, will chastise you seven times for 
your sins. 

sisai. 9. 20. Mic. 6. 14. Hag. 1. 6. 
y ver. 21, 24, z Isai. 59. 18, and 63. 3, and 
66. 15. Jer. 21. 5. Ezek. 5. 13, 15, and b. 13. 



use of one family ; but it is by no means 
impossible to bake at one of them an 
adequate supply of bread for ten fami- 
lies, although, of course, the process 
would consume time. We therefore do 
not, with most expositors, understand 
scarcity to be implied in the simple fact 
that ten families baked their bread in 
an oven for one ; but that ten families, 
represented by their females, clubbed 
their dough together, and the produce 
being no more than an ordinary supply 
for one family, it was baked in one 
oven, instead of each family, as usual, 
making a separate baking. Afterwards, 
the cakes thus baked were proportioned 
by weight to the respective contributors 
— so precious was the bread. This is 
implied in the Avords, ^ shall deliver 
you your bread again by weight j' 
which shows that the bread was pre- 
viously theirs, and had been baked for 
them, not that it was sold to them by 

weight.' IT Shall deliver you your 

bread again by weight. No language 
could be more expressive of the extrem- 
ities to which they should be reduced. 
As the survivors of a shipwreck, who 
put to sea in an open boat, are often 
reduced to the most stinted allowance, 
and have a small quantity of food and 
drink served out to them by weight and 
measure, so should it be in the extrem- 
ity of famine to which the Israelites 
should be brought by their disobedience. 
Iq allusion to this it is threatened again, 
Ezek. 4. 16, 17, ' I will break the staff 
23* 



29 a And ye shall eat the flesh of 
your sons, and the flesh of your 
daughters shall ye eat. 

30 And b I will destroy your high 
places, and cut down your images, 
and c cast your carcasses upon the 
carcasses of your idols, and my 
soul shall d abhor you. 

a Deut. 23. 63. 2 Kings 6. 29. Ezek. 5. 
10. Lam. 4. 10. b 2 Chron. 34. 3, 4, 7. 
Isai. 27. 9. Ezek. 6. 3, 4, 6, 6, 13. c 2 
Kings 23. 20. 2 Chron. 34. 5. d Lev. 20. 23. 
Ps. 78. 59, and 89. 38. Jer. 14. 19. 

of bread in Jerusalem, and they shall 
eat bread by weight, and with care, and 
they shall drink water by measure, and 
with astonishment ', that they may want 
bread and water, and be astonied one 
with another, and consume away for 
their iniquity^' 

29. Ye shall eat the flesh of your sonSj 
&c. This was Hterally fulfilled at the 
siege of Samaria, 2 Kings 6. 29, in the 
days of Jehoram, and also in that of 
Jerusalem, under Titus. Josephus, 
J. W. B. 7, c. 2, gives an instance in 
dreadful detail, of a woman named 
Mary, who in the height of the famine, 
during the siege, killed her infant child, 
roasted, and had eaten part of it when 
discovered by the soldiers.' The fear- 
ful accomplishment of the threatened 
punishment is thus bewailed by Jere- 
miah, Lam. 4. 10, ' The hands of the 
pitiful women have sodden their own 
children ; they were their meat in the 
destruction of the daughter of my 
people.' 

30. I will destroy your high places, 
"What those were is not agreed, but 
probably they were raised places, arti- 
ficial eminences, upon which they were 
wont to worship their idols. The word 
rendered ' images ' clearly denotes some 
species of idol, though of what particu- 
lar kind is doubtful. Comp. 2 Chron. 
34. 7. The probability is that they 
were some kind of idolatrous fabrica- 
tion, dedicated to the sun. IT And 

cast your carcasses upon the carcasses 



270 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



31 e And I will make your cities 
waste, and ^ bring your sanctuaries 
unto desolation, and I will not 
smell the savour of your sweet 
odours. 

e Neh. 2. 3. Jer. 4. 7. Ezek. 6. 6. f Ps. 
74. 7. Lam. 1. 10. Ezek. 9. 6, and 21. 7. 

of your idols. They shall be denied a 
seemly burial or a quiet repose in their 
graves. Thus Ezek. 6. 4, 5, 13, ' I will 
cast down your slain men before your 
idols J and I will lay the dead carcasses 
of the children of Israel before their 
idols J and I will scatter your bones 
round about your altars.' Comp. 2 Kings 
23. 20. 2 Chron. 34. 5. 

31. I will make your cities waste. 
The fulfilment of this minatory predic- 
tion has been so signal, that we cannot 
refrain from inserting from Keith the 
following graphic illustration of its 
effects. ^ By the concurring testimony 
of all travellers, Judea may now be 
called a field of ruins. Columns, the 
memorials of ancient magnificence, now 
covered with rubbish, and buried under 
ruins, may be found in all Syria. From 
Mount Tabor is beheld an immensity 
of plains, interspersed with hamlets, 
fortresses, and heaps of ruins. Of the 
celebrated cities Capernaum, Bethsaida, 
Gadara, Tarichea, and Chorazin, no- 
thing remains but shapeless ruins. 
Some vestiges of Emmaus may still be 
seen. Cana is a very paltry village. 
The ruins of Tekoa present only the 
foundations of some considerable build- 
ings. The city of Nain is now a ham- 
let. The ruins of the ancient Sapphura 
announce the previous existence of a 
large city, and its name is still preserved 
in the appellation of a miserable village 
called Sephoury. Loudd, the ancient 
Lydda and Diospolis, appears like a 
place lately ravaged by fire and sword, 
and is one continued heap of rubbish 
and ruins. Ramla, the ancient Arima- 
thea, is in almost as ruinous a state. 
Nothing but rubbish is to be found within 
jts boundaries. In the adjacent country 



32 gAnd I will bring the land 
into desolation : and your enemies 
which dwell therein, shall be 
h astonished at it. 

g Jer. 9. 11, and 25. 11. 18. li Deut. 28. 
37. 1 Kings 9. 8. Jer. 18. 16, and 19. 8. 
Ezek. 5. 15. 

there are found at every step dry wells, 
cisterns fallen in, and vast vaulted res- 
ervoirs, which prove that in ancient 
times this town must have been upwards 
of a league and a half in circumference. 
Csesarea can no longer excite the envy 
of a conqueror, and has long been aban- 
doned to silent desolation. The city 
of Tiberias is now almost abandoned, 
and its subsistence precarious j of the 
towns that bordered on its lake there 
are no traces left. Zabulon, once the 
rival of Tyre and Sidon, is a heap of 
ruins. A few shapeless stones, unworthy 
the attention of the traveller, mark the 
site of the Saffre. The ruins of Jericho, 
covering no less than a square mile, are 
surrounded with complete desolation; 
and there is not a tree of any descrip- 
tion, either of palm or balsam, and 
scarcely any verdure or bushes to be 
seen about the site of this abandoned 
city. Bethel is not to be found. The 
ruins of Sarepta, and of several large 
cities in its vicinity, are now * mere 
rubbish, and are only distinguishable 
as the sites of towns by heaps of dilapi- 
dated stones and fragments of columns.' 
How marvellously are the predictions 
of their desolation verified, when in 
general nothing but ruined ruins form 
the most di tinguished remnants of the 
cities of Israel ; and when the multitude 
of its towns are almost ail left, with 
many a vestige to testify of their num- 
ber, but without a mark to tell their 

name.^ IT And bring your sanctua' 

ries unto desolation. As they had, 
properly speaking, but one sanctuary, 
the term here is undoubtedly used in a 
large sense including the tabernacle, 
the temple, and the various synagogues 
scattered over the land. 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVI. 



271 



33 And i I will scatter you among 
the heathen, and will draw out a 
sword after you, and your land 
shall be desolate, and your cities 
waste. 

34 kThen shall the land enjoy 
her sabbaths, as long as it lieth 
desolate, and ye be in your ene- 
mies' land ; even then shall the 
land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths. 

35 As long as it lieth desolate it 
shall rest ; because it did not rest 
in your i sabbaths, when ye dwelt 
upon it. 

36 And upon them that are left 
alive of you, ^1 will send a faint- 
ness into their hearts in the lands 
of their enemies ; and n the sound 
of a shaken leaf shall chase them; 
and they shall flee, as fleeing from 

i Deut. 4. 27, and 28. 64. Ps. 44. 11. Jer. 
9. 16. Ezek. 12. 15, and 20. 23, and 22. 15. 
Zech. 7. 14. k 2 Chron. 36. 21. 1 ch. 25. 2. 
m Ezek. 21. 7, 12, 15. » ver. 17, Job. 15. 
21. Prov. 2S. 1. 

33. I will scatter you among the hea- 
then. Heb. rr^tji^ ezj'ahj I will fan or 
winnow you. The term properly im- 
plies that kind of scattering which is 
the effect of winnowing grain, where 
the chaff is carried away by the wind. 
Comp. a similar use of the word, Ps. 
44. 12, Zech. 7. 14 

34. Then shall the land enjoy her 
sabbaths as long as it lieth desolate. 
This is shown by Houbigant to have 
proved to be a historical fact. From 
Saul to the Babylonish captivity are 
numbered about 490 years, during which 
period there were of course 70 sab- 
baths of years. Now the Babylonish 
captivity lasted 70 years, and during 
that time the land of Israel rested. 
Therefore the land rested just as many 
years in the Babylonish captivity, as it 
should have rested sabbaths, if the Jews 
had observed the law relative to the 
sabbatic years. 

39. They that are left of you shall 
pine away in their iniquity. The most 
obvious import of ' pining away in ini- 



a sword ; and they shall fall, when 
none pursueth. 

37 And o they shall fall one upoa 
another, as it were before a sword, 
when none pursueth: and pye 
shall have no power to stand be- 
fore your enemies. 

38 And ye shall perish among 
the heathen, and the land of your 
enemies shall eat you up. 

39 And they that are left of you 
q shall pine away in their iniquity 
in your enemies' lands ; and also 
in the iniquities of their fathers 
shall they pine away with them. 

40 rif they shall confess their 
iniquity, and the iniquity of their 
fathers, with their trespass which 

Isai. 10. 4. See Judg. 7. 22. 1 Sam. 14, 
15, 16. P Josh. 7. 12, 13. Judg. 2. 14. 
q Deut. 4. 27, and 28. 65. Neh. 1. 9. Jer. 
3. 25, and 29. 12, 13. Ezek. 4. 17, and 6. 9, 
and 20. 43, and 24. 23, and 33. 10, and 36. 31. 
Hos. 5. 15. Zech. 10. 9. r Numb. 5. 7. 1 
Kings 8. 33, 35, 47. Neh. 9. 2. Dan. 9. 3, 4. 
Prov. 28. 13. Luke 15. 18. 1 John 1. 9. 

quity ' is, to consume and perish in the 
punishment for iniquity ; in allusion to 
which it is said, Ezek. 33. 10, ' If our 
transgressions and our sins be upon us, 
and we pine away in them, how should 
we then live ?^ Comp. Ezek. 24. 23. 
Ainsworth suggests that it may likewise 
imply the beginning of grace, or a godly 
contrition in them that are left, i. e. 
' the remnant, according to the election 
of grace,' Rom. 11. 5, who by their sore 
chastisements are brought to an humb- 
ling consciousness of their sins, and 
made to feel that they are pining away 
in them ; or as is expressed by the pro- 
phet, Ezek. 36. 31, ' Ye shall loathe 
yourselves in your own sight for your 
iniquities.' 

Promises of restored Favor upon Re- 
pentance. 
40. If they shall confess their iniqui- 
ty, &c. The portion contained between 
this verse and the end, may be consider- 
ed as the third general division of the 
chapter, comprising a series of gracious 



272 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



they trespassed against me, and 
that also they have walked con- 
trary unto me ; 
41 And that I also have walked 
contrary unto them, and have 
brought them into the land of their 

6 See Jer. 6. 10, and 9. 25, 26. Ezek. 44. 



assurances of returning favor, upon 
their humble and sincere repentance. 
It declares that if, even in their worst 
and lowest state, they should penitent- 
ly confess their iniquities, and acknow- 
ledge the mighty mind of God in their 
afflictions, and should meekly accept 
them as the punishment of their sins, 
then the Lord v/ould again remember 
his covenant with their fathers, and re- 
store to them his favor. The history 
of the nation, followed out in its details, 
confirms the truth of these promises no 
less clearly than it does of the threat- 
enings recorded above. Never did Is- 
rael repent and seek the face of their 
God in vain. Whenever they returned 
to him in penitence and prayer, putting 
away their idols and renewing their obe- 
dience, he returned also to them in the 
various tokens of his mercy, delivering 
them from their enemies, restoring to 
them the years which the canker-worm 
had eaten, and blessing them with peace 
and plenty. A most striking specimen 
of the humble confession and fervent 
prayer here alluded to, is to be found in 
the ninth chapters respectively of Dan- 
iel, of Ezra, and in the first of Nehe- 
miah. We there see which kind of hu- 
miliation is acceptable before God, and 
"what gracious expressions of kindness 
it meets with. And so we learn from 
the sure word of prophecy, that there 
"will yet come again a great and univer- 
sal repentance of that ancient, honored, 
and afflicted people ; that they shall 
look upon him whom they have pierced 
and mourn ; that they will return and 
seek the Lord their God, and the spirit- 
ual David their king ; and that then the 
Lord will set his hand a second time, 
and gather them out of all nations 



enemies; if then their s uncircum- 
cised hearts be t humbled, and they 
then accept of the punishment of 
their iniquity : 

7. Acts 7. 51. Rom. 2. 29. Col. 2. 11. t i 
Kings 21. 29. 2 Chron. 12. 6, 7, 12, and .32. 
26, and 33. 12, 13. 



among whom they are scattered, and 
plant them again in their own land, 
where they shall for a long tract of ages 
be partakers in the richest blessings of 

the Gospel. IT And the iniquity of 

their fathers. The principle of the uni- 
ty of the different generations of the 
Jewish race is recognized all along the 
line of their history. The children were 
to repent of the sins of their fathers, 
and if they could not be absolved from 
their own sins, except on condition of 
confessing their fathers', their fathers' 
iniquities, unrepented of, became their 
own, and also the punishment due to 
them. 

41. If then their uncircmncised hearts 
he humbled. Chal. ' Gross, or foolish, 
hearts.' Targ. Jon. ^ Proud hearts.' The 
phrase implies a perverse heart ; one j 
which prompted them to resist the spirit ij 
of God. Accordingly we find the Jews 
in the apostles' times thus character- 
ized : Acts 7. 51, * Ye stiflf-necked and 
un circumcised in heart and ears, ye do 
always resist the Holy Ghost.' This is 
said because, as we learn elsewhere, 
Rom. 2. 29, the true circumcision is ' in 
the heart,' and ' in the spirit.' Con- 
formably to this the prophet complains, 
Jer. 9. 26, that ' all the house of Israel 

are uncircumcised in heart. ^ IT Ac- 

cept of the punishment of their iniquity. 
Heb. WIJ" riJs^ liZ'n'^ yirtzu eth avondm, 
accept of their iniquity. As the words 
^ iniquity ' and ' sin ' are often used by 
an idiom of the Hebrew for the ^ pun- 
ishment ' due to transgression, so to 
accept the same is meekly and willingly 
to bear it, and even to be well pleased 
with it (the term in the original being 
the same with that employed, v. 34, and 
rendered ^ enjoy'), as the most suitable 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVL 



273 



42 Then will I u remember my 
covenant with Jacob, and also my 
covenant with Isaac, and also my 
covenant with Abraham will I re- 



u Exod. 2. 24, and 6. 5. Ps. 106. 45. 
16. 60. 



Ezek. 



means to bring them to repentance. 
An illustration of this sentiment occurs, 
IVIic. 7. 9, 'I will bear the indignation 
ci the Lord, for I have sinned against 
him.' 

42. Then will I remember my cove- 
nant. This remembrance on the part 
of God signifies his actual performance 
of the mercies promised ; as appears 
from Ex. 6. 6, 6, 'I have remembered 
my covenant^ &c. and will bring you out 
from under the burdens of the Egyp- 
tians.' So our remembering God's pre- 
cepts is explained, Ps. 103. IS, as equi- 
valent to doing them. See Note on 
Gen. 8, 1. So again when Christ, ' the 
horn of salvation,' v/as raised up in the 
house of David, God is said, Luke 1. 72, 
^ to perform the mercy promised to our 
fathers, and to remember his holy cove- 
nant.'' It is somewhat singular that in 
the original, the preposition answering 
to ^ with' is omitted before each of the 
patriarchs' names in this connexion, 
and the fact ought to have been indi- 
cated by the usual Italic sign, in our 
version. The reason of the omission, 
or the bearing it ought to have on the 
construction, v/e are incompetent to 
state. The Gr. has fxpnc^Orjaoiiai rris Sia- 
Br}K7]9 laKwBj I will remember the cove- 
nant of Jacobs &c., omitting the suffix 

' my ' which occurs in the Hebrew. 

IT Will remember the land. That is, to 
cause it to be repeopled by its former 
inhabitants or their seed. 

43. The land shall also be left of them. 
Heb. an^O mehem, which may be ren- 
dered either by them, or 07i their account, 
for their sakes. This verse, in the 
connexion in which it stands, is some- 
what obscure. As the tone of the con- 
text is bland and encouraging, we nat- 
urally inquire how it is that a transition 



member; and I will « remember 
the land. 

43 y The land also shall be left 
of them, and shall enjoy her sab- 
baths, while she lieth desolate 

^ Ps. 136. 23. y yer. 34, 35. 

is suddenly made to the language of 
threatening. It seems, on the whole, 
on comparing it with what follows, that 
the design of its introduction here is to 
heighten the expression of mercy ia 
the ensuing verse. God had said in the 
preceding verse that he would ' remem- 
ber the land ;' but the favor involved in 
such a promise, could only be appre- 
ciated by a just view of the condition to 
which the land would have been re- 
duced by reason of the sins of its inhab- 
itants. Notv^ithstanding it should have 
been left destitute of its occupants, who 
were driven away into penal exile, and 
should thus remain desolate and uncul- 
tivated, enjoying the septennial sabbaths 
which had been denied it in their sea- 
son, yet for all that, he would not for- 
get or forego his mercies ; he would re- 
member the land by remembering its 
possessors, and bringing them back from, 
their dispersion and planting them 

again within its borders. IT And shall 

enjoy her sabbaths. Heb. Tii^ f^'lfl 
n^^rilntU tiretz eth shabbethothehd. Gr. 

irpoaSe^erai. ra aaPiSara avr)]S, shall 7*6- 

ceive her sabbaths. The true force of 
the language in this verse can be under- 
stood only by a correct explication of 
the original word for ^ enjoy,' which is 
employed here and also in the subse- 
quent clause, ' shall accept (llZ^'i yir- 
tzu) of the punishment of their in- 
iquity.' Its primary meaning is to have 
pleasure, delight, complacency in any 
thing ; and the drift of the passage is 
undoubtedly to convey the idea, by an 
ironical intimation, that while the land 
in its desolation was having pleasure in 
its sabbaths, the people of Israel were 
also, if the expression could be allowed, 
having pleasure in the punishment of 
their iniquity. There would at least 



274 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



without them : and they shall ac- 
cept of the punishment of their 
iniquity ; because, even because 
they z despised my judgments, and 
because their soul abhorred my 
statutes. 

44 Andyetfor all that, when they 
be in the land of their enemies, a I 
will not cast them away, neither 
will I abhor them, to destroy them 
utterly, and to break my covenant 



z ver. 14. 
Rom. 11.2. 



a Deut. 4. 31. 2 Kings 13. 23. 



be so much of a parallel in the two 
cases, that ihe same form of speech 
should be employed in reference to 
both. It is indeed a bold figure of 
speech to represent the inhabitants as 
taking pleasure in the calamities which 
they had procured to themselves ; but 
as they had voluntarily incurred them 
* despising the judgments of God and 
abhorring his statutes,' when perfectly 
aware of the consequences, was he not 
authorized to charge them with having 
complacency in the course of trans- 
gression which they had adopted ? He 
is but stating the legitimate conclusion 
to be drawn from the premises. On 
this view of the language it is not only 
strictly proper, but highly significant 
and emphatic, and pointed with the 

sting of a well merited rebuke. 

IT Because, even because they despised 
my judgments, &c. The particle is 
here doubled, to give intensity to the 
alleged reason of their calamities, and 
to intimate that it was nothing else than 
their deliberate rejection of the divine 
laws which had procured them. If so, 
had they any grounds to be surprised 
that it was charged upon them that 
they preferred, were pleased with, en- 
joyed, the natural results of their con- 
duct? This interpretation, it will be 
seen, perfecily harmonizes with that 
given above. 

44. Yet for all that, when they he in 
the land of their enemies, &c. The his- 
tory of the Jewish people to the pre- 



with them: for I am the Lord 
their God. 

45 But I will b for their sakes re- 
member the covenant of their an- 
cestors, c whom I brought forth out 
of the land of Egypt din the sight 
of the heathen, that I might be 
their God : I am the Lord. 

46 e These are the statutes, and 

b Rom. 11. 28. c ch. 22. 33, and 25. 33. 
d Ps. 98. 2. Ezek. 20. 9, 14, 22. e ch. 27. 
34. Deut. 6. 1, and 12. 1, and 33. 4. John 
1. 17. 

sent day, is a standing proof of the 
truth of this merciful declaration. 
Though scattered and peeled, and press- 
ed down by an unprecedented weight 
of misfortunes from age to age, yet they 
still subsist as a distinct people, and 
the covenant of future restoration re- 
mains to them unbroken. It may be 
remarked, moreover, as their plagues 
and afilictions, as a people, are at this 
day vastly mitigated, and every year 
growing less and less, by reason of the 
increasing humanity of civil codes and 
a softened tone of public sentiment 
throughout the civilized world, we are 
doubtless warranted to believe that the 
period of their deliverance has well-nigh 
arrived, and that nothing is needed to 
this result but the spirit on their part 
of profound repentance and the humble 
confession here prescribed. 

45. Iwill for their sakes remember 
the covenant, &c. That is, for their 
good and advantage. He does not in- J 
deed, in this connexion expressly assure 1 
them of their being brought back to 
their own land, but the whole scope of 
the context requires us to understand it. 
How could he effectually remember 
them for good when in the land of their 
enemies, otherwise than by restoring 
their captivity ? And why should he 
refer to the deliverance from Egypt, ( 
except to intimate that in like manner 

he would bring them to their own bor- 
ders? 

46. These are the statutes j and judg- 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVII. 



275 



judgments, and laws, which the 
Lord made between him and the 
children of Israel fin mount Sinai 
by the hand of Moses. 

f ch. 25. 1. a Numb. 6. 2. See Judges 11. 
30, 31, 39. 1 Sam. 1. 11, 28. 

merits, and laws, &c. This verse ap- 
pears so peculiarly proper, as the con- 
elusion of the whole book, that it is ex- 
tremely difficult to account for the ad- 
dition of the chapter which follows, 
containing matter of a ceremonial kind, 
such as would come in far more appro- 
priately in a preceding part of the book. 
Adam Clarke proposes to solve the dif- 
ficulty by supposing that there has been 
an accidental transposition of chap. 27, 
from where it belongs, at the close of 
the 25th. Others think that the 27th was 
added after the book was finished ; but 
nothing is certain, and we have to re- 
ceive the sacred canon as we find it. 



CHAPTER XXVII. 

It is and always has been customary 
in different countries and under various 
systems of religion, for persons in pe- 
culiar circumstances of prosperity or 
adversity, to vow that they will make 
certain offerings, or devote certain pro- 
perties to the service of God. To such 
vows, usually called ^13 neder, most 
of the present chapter refers. Under 
the influence of extraordinary zeal in- 
ividuals, for instance, might sometimes 
be induced to consecrate themselves, 
their children, or estate, to God by what 
is here termed a ' singular vow.' But 
it was possible that upon reflection, in 
a cooler moment, the person might re- 
gret the step he had taken, or particular 
circumstances might render the literal 
performance of this vow inconvenient or 
unsuitable, in which case provision is 
made in the present chapter for the re- 
demption of the persons or things thus 
consecrated, and a table of rates is here 
given by which the priests were to be 
governed in their estimation of the value 



CHAPTER XXVII. 

AND the Lord spake unto Mo- 
ses, saying, 
2 Speak unto the children of Is- 
rael, and say unto them, a When a 
man shall make a singular vow, 

of the thing vowed. It does not ap- 
pear that it was the purpose of the law 
to enforce the practice, but merely to 
place a natural impulse of devotion un- 
der wise regulations. If an Israelite 
under such an impulse should bind him- 
self or his child by a vow, to be a ser- 
vant of the sanctuary, he might com- 
mute that service by paying a specified 
pecuniary equivalent, varying with sex 
and age, into the sacred treasury ; and 
if he were too poor to pay the prescrib- 
ed sum, it was in the discretion of the 
priest to fix upon some other, propor- 
tioned to his means. If the vow related 
to the gift of an animal, it must, by all 
means, be ofiered in sacrifice, if suitable 
to be so offered ; and whoever was de- 
tected in attempting to substitute for it 
one of inferior worth, was punished by 
the forfeiture of both. If it were an 
unclean animal that had been consecrat- 
ed, the owner might still retain it, if, 
on reflection, such was his wish, on the 
payment of one-fifth more than the 
priest declared to be its value. On the 
same condition a house or a farm, con- 
secrated as a religious offering, might 
be redeemed. The estimation of the 
value of an estate so consecrated was to 
have reference to the length of the inter- 
val between the time of the consecration 
and a jubilee year, at which time it re- 
verted to its owner ; and this provision 
held equally good, if the estate conse- 
crated was one of which the devotee 
was only a tenant. But the details of 
the various provisions of the present law 
will come before us as we proceed. 

The Law of a Singular Vow when it 
had respect to Persons, 
2. When a man shall make a singular 
vow. Heb. 'niD i^^S'i "^^ 1I5^J^ ish hi 



276 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



the persons shall he for the Lord, 
by thy estimation. 

3 And thy estimation shall be, 
of the male from twenty years old 

yaphli neder, a man when he shall have 
singled out, separated, signalized a vow. 
The word ' singular ' in our version is 
doubtless tantamount to extraordinary, 
and yet as there is no corresponding 
epithet in the original, the idea is in- 
volved in the force of the verb Jj^^^'^ 
yaphli=il^'D^ yaphleh, which latter, as 
we have seen (Note on Ex. 8. 22,) has 
the import of separating or setting 
apart in a wonderful and glorious man- 
ner. The usage is still farther illus- 
trated by reference to the case of the 
Nazarite, Num. 6. 2, ' When a man or 
Avoman shall separate (i^^S'^ yaphli) 
to vow a vow,' &c., 1. e. shall signally 
separate. It is rendered by the Gr. 
hg av i^syaXcog ev^erai ev^riv, whoever shall 
greatly vow a vow. So here the idea 
is of vowing something in a signal way, 
in a mode striking and extraordinary. 
By Philo this kind of vow is termed 
tvxv f-ieyaXv, the great vow, as being an 
act of special and distinguished devo- 
tion. The epithet * singular,' there- 
fore, in this connexion is equivalent to 

' singling out.' ^ The persons shall 

he for the Lord, by thy estimation. 
Heb. mn^i) niD&D "j^D^S^n beerkeka 
nephdshothlaihovah, by thy estimation 
the souls, or persons (shall be) for the 
Lord. A man might dedicate himself 
to the service of the sanctuary, and be- 
come, as it were, a servant attached 
thereto. In the same way he might 
vow his child. Samuel was thus devot- 
ed by his mother, and remained in the 
service of the sanctuary ; for that ap- 
propriation being apparently satisfacto- 
ry to all parties, he was not redeemed 
according to the valuation here fixed for 
different ages and sexes. But the actual 
personal dedication was seldom prac- 
tised, and hence the meaning undoubt- 
edly is, that the service of the persons 



even unto sixty years old ; even 
thy estimation shall be fifty shekels 
of silver, b after the shekel of the 
sanctuary. 

b Exod. 30. 13. 

thus devoted was not usually to be em- 
ployed in the sanctuary, but a value set 
upon it by the priest, and ^Aa/ employed 
for the Lord, i. e. for holy uses in gen- 
eral. The reason for this substitution 
probably was, that there was a suffi- 
cient number of persons officially de- 
signated for all the various work of the 
tabernacle ; and this a more numerous 
attendance would merely encumber and 
retard. On the expression * thy estima- 
tion,' commentators have disputed 
whose estimation as intended ; whether 
that of the priest, the ruler, or the wor- 
shipper, to be made from time to time. 
The obvious sense would seem to be, that 
it is addressed to the people at large. 
It is the language of law addressed to 
the community for which it is designed. 
Rosenmuller however, suggests that the 
original word "iD^y erkeku is here to 
be taken not in an active but passive 
sense — the estimation at which thou 
shalt be rated. It was not, he re- 
marks, the province of any individual 
to fix the rate of redemption, not even 
of the priest, except in the cases men- 
tioned V. 8, 12, but of God himself, who 
in the present chapter proceeds to spe- 
cify the terms on his own sovereign 
authority. This construction differs lit- 
tle from that we have given. 

3. Thy estimation shall he of the 
male, &c. He begins with the male, 
and that too in the prime of life, 
when his services would be most valu- 
able ; and it will be observed that the 
rate is the same for persons of all con- 
ditions, to show that God regarded the 
vow, and not the rank of those who 
made it. The estimation in this case 
was to be 50 shekels of silver, which 
reckoned in our currency would be not 
far from $36. For a woman of the 
same age about $22 ; for a boy from 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVIL 



277 



4 And if it be a female, then thy 
estimation shall be thirty shekels. 

5 And if it he from five years old 
even unto twenty years old, then 
thy estimation shall be of the male 
twenty shekels, and for the female 
ten shekels. 

6 And if it he from a month old 
even unto five years old, then thy 
estimation shall be of the male five 
shekels of silver, and for the female 
thy estimation shall he three she- 
kels of silver. 

7 And if it he from sixty years old 
and above ', if it be a male, then thy 

five to twenty, $15 ; for a girl of the 
same age, $12; a male child, $4; a 
female, $3 j a man above sixty, $11 ; a 
woman, $6. The rules of mortality are 
the principle on which these rates are 
graduated. The value was regulated 
according to the probability of life and 
service. None were vowed under a 
month old : and the first-born, being 
considered by a prior law, Ex. 12., the 
Lord's property, could not be vowed at 
at all. 

4. If it he a female. The estimation 
of a female is here fixed at little more 
than one half that of a man, for the ob- 
vious reason that a woman if employed 
would not be of so much service in the 
sanctuary as the man. It is supposed, 
with great probability, that under the 
provision contained in this case Jeph- 
thah might have redeemed his daughter. 
See the point discussed at full length in 
the Note on Judg. 11. 30. 

5. If it be from five years old, &c. 
It is supposed in this case that the vow 
was made by the parents, or one of 
them, and not by the child himself, who 
at that age was wholly incompetent to 
such a thing. Samuel, who was thus 
vowed to God, was not redeemed, be- 
cause he was a Levite and a particular 
favorite, and therefore was employed 
in his childhood in the service of the 
sanctuary. 

8. If he be poorer than thy estimation. 
24 



estimation shall be fifteen shekels, 
and for the female ten shekels. 

8 But if he be poorer than thy 
estimation, then he shall present 
himself before the priest, and the 
priest shall value him : according 
to his ability that vowed shall the 
priest value him. 

9 And if it he a beast whereof 
men bring an offering unto the 
Lord, all that any man giveth of 
such unto the Lord shall be holy. 

10 He shall not alter it, nor 
change it, a good for a bad, or a 
bad for a good : and if he shall at 



That is, if he who made the vow be not 
able to pay the estimated value, then 
the priest shall rate the value according 

to his ability to pay. IT Then he 

shall present himself. Heb. n^^^S^n 
heemido, he shall make him to stand ; 
i. e. the man who vowed shall present 
either himself or the subject of his vow. 
The term in the original is so framed 
as to include both. 

Respecting Beasts that are vowed and 
their Valuation. 

9. A beast whereof men bring an 
offering. That is, of the prescribed 
kinds of v;hich they are accustomed 
to bring an offering ; by which is meant 
clean beasts, unblemished, viz. bullocks, 
sheep, or goals. These could not be 
redeemed ; and the firstlings, being al- 
ready consecrated to God, could not be 

thus devoted. IT Shall be holy. Set 

apart for God's service according to the 
nature of the vow ; that is to say, it 
shall be offered at the altar if given or 
vowed for sacrifice j or shall be given 
to the Priests or Levites if vowed for 
that end ; or shall be sold and the value 
of it employed in the service of the 
sanctuary, if given with that intention ; 
or left at large to be disposed of as 
should be deemed most meet for the 
service of God. 

10. He shall not alter or change it. 
By ' alter ' here is probably meant the 



278 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491. 



all change beast for beast, then it 
and the exchange thereof shall be 
holy. 

11 Andif z7 he any unclean beast, 
of which they do not offer a sacri- 
fice unto the Lord, then he shall 
present the beast before the priest : 

12 And the priest shall value it, 
whether it be good or bad : as thou 
valuest it who art the priest, so 
shall it be. 

13 cBut if he will at all redeem 
it, then he shall add a fifth jpart 
thereof unto thy estimation. 

c ver. 15. 19. 

substituting any other kind of beast or 
any other thing in its stead ; whereas 
to ' change ' it is to give any other beast 
of the same species in its place. What- 
ever was consecrated to God by a vow 
or purpose of heart was considered from 
that moment as the Lord's property ; 
to change which was impiety ; to with- 
hold it sacrilege, ^ Then it and the 

exchange shall he holy. That is, both 
of them shall be considered as conse- 
crated to the Lord, and henceforth his 
property. The man was thus to be 
mulcted for his rashness, and the Jew- 
ish canonists say that he was to be 
beaten with stripes in addition. 

11. And if it he any unclean beast. 
This may be understood generally of 
all unclean beasts, such as asses, cam- 
els, or other beasts of burden, which 
men might be prompted to vow, with 
the exception of the dog, of which it is 
said, Deut. 23. 18, ' Thou shalt not 
bring the price of a dog into the house 
of the Lord thy God for any vow.' The 
Hebrews, however, understood it of 
oxen, sheep, or goats, upon which any 
blemishes were found, whereby they 
became unclean, and were rendered un- 
lawful to be offered upon the altar. 

12. Whether it he good or had. That 
is, whether it be of great or small value. 

13. But if he will at all redeem it, 
&c. It was at the man's option either 
to leave the beast with the priest, or to 



14 T[ And when a man shall 
sanctify his house to be holy unto 
the Lord, then the priest shall es- 
timate it, whether it be good or 
bad: as the priest shall estimate 
it, so shall it stand. 

15 dAnd if he that sanctified it 
will redeem his house, then he 
shall add the fifth part of the 
money of thy estimation unto it, 
and it shall be his. 

16 And if a man shall sanctify 
unto the Lord some part of a field 

d ver. 13. 

pay him the price at which he had 
rated it. If he chose the latter, it was 
a sign that he deemed it worth more 
than the price which the priest had set 
upon it. The law was probably in- 
tended to prevent rash vows, by annex- 
ing somewhat of a penalty to them in 
the form of a pecuniary fine. 

The Estimation of a devoted House. 

14. When a man shall sanctify his 
house to he holy unto the Lord. That 
is, sanctify or set it apart by a dedi- 
cating vow. ^ As the priest shall 

estimate it, so shall it stand. That is, 
such shall the value be, neither less nor 
more ; no man shall attempt to alter it ; 
only the owner if he would redeem it 
was to give the additional fifth part of 
the value ; inasmuch as he should have 
considered well before he vowed it. 

The Estimation of a devoted Field. 

16. Part of afield of his possession. 
The phrase 'field of one's possession^ 
signifies a field inherited from one's 
forefathers, and is used in contradis- 
tinction from a ' field which one hath 
bought,' spoken of v. 22. Though the 
words ' some part' are not expressed in 
the original, yet it is generally allowed 
that they should here be supplied j as 
it was not lawful for a man in this 
manner to alienate his whole patri- 
mony. He might express his good will 



B. C. 149L] 



CHAPTER XXVII. 



279 



of his possession, then thy estima- 
tion shall be according to the seed 
thereof: an homer of barley seed 
shall be valued at fifty shekels of 
silver. 

17 If he sanctify his field from the 
year of jubilee, according to thy 
estimation it shall stand. 

18 But if he sanctify his field after 
the jubilee, then the priest shall 
e reckon unto him the money ac- 
cording to the years that remain, 
even unto the year of the jubilee, 
and it shall be abated from thy 
estimation. 

19 fAndifhe that sanctified the 
field will in any wise redeem it, 
then he shall add the fifth 'part of 
the money of thy estimation unto 
it, and it shall be assured to him. 

20 And if he will not redeem the 
field, or if he have sold the field 
to another man, it shall not be re- 
deemed any more. 

e ch. 25. 15, 16. f ver. 13. 



for the house of God, but he must not 
for this purpose impoverish his own 

family. IT Thy estimation shall be 

according to the seed thereof. That is, 
according to the quantity of the seed 
required for sowing it ; or perhaps ac- 
cording to the quantity of the produce. 

ir An homer of barley seed shall be 

valued at fifty shekels of silver. The 
meaning is, that as much land as re- 
quired a homer of barley to sow it 
should be valued at fifty shekels of 
silver. The homer was very different 
from the omer ; the latter held about 
three quarts, the former seventy-five 
gallons and three pints. 

18. If he sanctify his field after the 
jubilee, &c. That is, the field shall be 
reckoned more or less in value accord- 
ing to the number of years remaining 
to the year of jubilee. 

20. If he have sold the field. That 
is, if the priest have sold it to another 
man, he who vowed it, could not then 
redeem it, though he had the option of 



21 But the field, g when it goeth 
out in the jubilee, shall be holy 
unto the Lord, as a field h devoted : 
ithe possession thereof shall be 
the priest's. 

22 And if « ma/z sanctify unto the 
Lord a field which he hath bought, 
which is not of the fields of this 
possession ; 

23 i Then the priest shall reckon 
unto him the worth of thy estima- 
tion, eve7i unto the year of the ju- 
bilee : and he shall give thine 
estimation in that day, as an holy 
thing unto the Lord. 

24 m In the year of the jubilee the 
field shall return unto him of whom 
it was bought, even to him to 
whom the possession of the land 
did belong. 

25 And all thy estimations shall 
be according to the shekel of the 

g ch. 25. 10, 28, 31. ^ ver. 28. i Numb. 
18. 14. Ezek. 44. 29. k ch. 25. 10, 25. 
1 ver. 18. m ch. 25. 28. 

doing SO before ; and if he who vowed 
it did not redeem it ' when it goeth out 
(of the possession of the purchaser), in 
the jubilee, it shall be holy (set apart) 
unto the Lord, as a field devoted (to 
his service) j the possession thereof 
shall be the priest's,^ v. 21, and the per- 
son who vowed it could never redeem it. 

22-24. If a man sanctify unto the 
Lord a field which he hath bought. 
Consequently a field which was no part 
of his patrimonial inheritance, but 
w^hich he had obtained by purchase 
from another source. When landed 
property of this kind was vowed, and 
of which the purchase or lease was to 
expire at the next jubilee, the priest 
w^as to fix a value upon it according to 
the number of years that should inter- 
vene till the next jubilee, and the vower 
might either redeem it or leave it to the 
priests ; but whichever he did, it was 
to return of course at the jubilee to the 
original owner or his heirs. 

25. All thy estimation shall he accord'' 



280 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 1491, 



sanctuary: » twenty geralis shall 
be the shekel. 

26 1[ Only the o firstlmg of the 
beasts, which should be the Lord's 
firstling, no man shall sanctify it; 
whether it be ox, or sheep : it is 
the Lord's. 

27 And if it be of an unclean 
beast, then he shall redeem it ac- 
cording to thine estimation, p and 

n Exod. 30. 13. Numb. 3. 47, and 18. 16. 
Ezek. 45. 12. o Exod. 13. 2, 12, and 22. 30. 
Numb. 18. 17. Deut. 15. 19. P vcr. 11, 12, 13. 

ijig to the shekel of the sanctuary. So 
called, it is supposed, from the fact that 
the standard of this as the foundation 
of all the other weights and measures 
was kept in the sanctuary. A literal 
rendering however of the original may 
be ' shekel of sanctity, or holiness ;' i. e. 
a true, just, honest shekel. 

Firstlings not to he Vowed. 

26. Only the firstling of the beasts, 
&c. These all belonged to God, by 
virtue of a previous express law, Ex.13. 
2, 12, 13,-22. 30, and it would be a 
kind of mockery to make an offering to 
another of that which was his own 
before. 

The Redemption of unclean Beasts. 

27. And if it be of an unclean beast. 
This is understood by Jarchi, of such 
unclean beasts as are spoken of v. 11, 
which a man set apart by vow ' to the 
repairs of the sanctuary.' Others, how- 
ever, understand it o( the firstling males 
of unclean beasts, which, as they were 
not consecrated to God by law, might 
be dedicated, or rather the proceeds of 
them, as votive offerings. Because an 
unclean beast might not be offered in 
sacrifice, it does not follow that the 
price of it might not be used in the re- 
pairs of the sanctuary and the mainte- 
nance of the priests, and therefore be 
the subject of a vow. 

Of Things irredeemably devoted. 

28. Notwithstanding, no devoted thing. 



shall add a fifth part of it thereto : 
or if it be not redeemed, then it 
shall be sold according to thy esti- 
mation. 
28 q Notwithstanding, no devoted 
thing that a man shall devote unto 
the Lord of all that he hath, both 
of man and beast, and of the field 
of his possession, shall be sold or 
redeemed : every devoted thing is 
most holy unto the Lord. 

q ver. 21. Josh. 6. 17, 18, 19. 



Heb. tD^n 'herem. Gr. avadEfxa, or 
curse. This is not the '^ID n'eder or 
common vow, such as we have previous- 
ly considered, but one of a far more sol- 
emn kind, and which is but inadequately 
represented by the term * devoted thing' 
in our version. It signifies properly a 
vow made with imprecations or execra- 
tions by the vower on himself or others 
if that should not be done in which he 
engaged. Of the precise difference be- 
tween the form of the "I^D neder and 
the d'ln ^herem, we are not particularly 
informed by Moses, but it is clear from 
this passage that a thing devoted to 
God by ^Agrem, was irrevocably devoted 
beyond the power of redemption. A 
man, for instance, devoted in this sol- 
emn way an ox, a cow, a field, to the 
Lord, imprecating a curse to himself if 
he withheld it, or ever reclaimed it, and 
a curse upon any one who should take 
it away or alienate it. Such things by 
this law could never be redeemed or 
appropriated to any other use ; and it 
is evident from the use of the word 
^ notwithstanding ' ("li^ ak, neverthe^ 
less), that this rule is introduced as an 
exception to the general regulations 
concerning vows contained in the pre- 
vious part of the chapter, by which re- 
demptions were amply provided for. 

IT Is most holy unto the Lord. Heb. 

D'^lDIp IDlp kodesh kodoshim, holi- 
ness of holinesses. Other things devoted 
by a simple vow were merely holy, but 
these, from the greater sanctity attached 



B. C. 1491.] 



CHAPTER XXVn. 



S81 



29 'None devoted, which shall be 
devoted of men, shall be redeemed : 
but shall surely be put to death. 

30 And s all the tithe of the land, 

r Numb. 21. 2, 3. s Gen. 28. 22. Numb. 
18. 21, 24. 2 Chron. 31. 6, 6, 12. Neh. 13. 
12. Mai. 3. 8, 10. 

to the transaction, were denominated 
most holy, and were not to be touched 
except by the priests. It may here be 
remarked that the peculiar word haremj 
applied to the female part of an oriental 
household establishment, is in all pro- 
bability derived from the same root 
with ^heremj and carries with it the 
implication of something set apart by 
the most sacred consecration, and which 
no one could invade without the danger 
of anathema and destruction. 

29. None devoted, which shall be de- 
voted of man, shall be redeemed, &c. 
Heb. fili^n y2 min hddddm, of man. 
It appears plain, beyond question, from 
V. 28, that human beings as well as 
brute beasts were among the subjects 
of the ^herem. The present phrase is 
undoubtedly correctly rendered ' of 
men,' i. e. as the subjects of the vow, 
instead of ' by men,' as the agents of it. 
Yet we can hardly suppose that the 
drift of the passage is to intimate that 
a parent or master should or could, 
merely from a sudden religious impulse, 
devote a child or servant to death, al- 
though the case of Jephthah approxi- 
mates very near to such a reckless and 
impious act. The legitimate import 
seems to be, to repeat in a more em- 
phatic manner that part of the precept 
in the preceding verse, which had res- 
pect to man ; or, in other words, simply 
to declare that when a person, whether 
child or slave, had been thus most sol- 
emnly and irrevocably given away to 
God, he was never on any consideration 
to be reclaimed or redeemed. But is it 
not said, however, that ' he shall surely 
be put to death,' and does not this imply 
that Israelitish parents and masters had 
the power of thus devoting their child- 
24* 



ivhether of the seed of the land, or 
of the fruit of the tree, is the 
Lord's: it is holy unto the Lord. 
31 t And if a man will at all re- 
deem aught of his tithes, he shall 
add thereto the fifth pari thereof. 

t ver. 13. 

ren or slaves to death ? To this it may be 
answered that the original phrase m?3 
ri^Ql*^ moth yumoth, dying shall die, 
may without violence be interpreted in 
this connexion, not of any violent death 
in consequence of the vow, but simply 
that he should remain in that devoted 
state until he died. This is the inter- 
pretation proposed by several distin- 
guished commentators, and, indeed, 
considering this law in relation to the 
duty o{ private individuals, there seems 
to be no other sense that does not 
outrage the spirit of the divine code, 
which breathes such a tender concern 
for human life. But the subject, it must 
be admitted, assumes another aspect, 
when viewed in relation to a national 
^herem, which might be made and exe- 
cuted against the public enemies of Is- 
rael, or those devoted nations who, by 
the special appointment of God, were 
doomed to remediless destruction. Such 
a vow on the part of the peculiar people 
was but an echo, as it were, of the 
^herem of the Almighty, and it was to 
be punctiliously executed. Thus the 
Canaanites were vowed to total excision, 
because God had thus decreed. Thus too, 
the city of Jericho in particular was de- 
voted, Josh. 6, 17, and the inhabitants 
of Jabesh-Gilead were put to death for 
violating the curse pronounced upon 
those who came not up to Mizpeh, 
Judg. 29. 10. Thus, too, if an Israelit- 
ish city introduced the worship of 
strange gods, it was in like manner to 
be devoted or confessed to God, and to 
remain unbuilt for ever. Deut. 13. 16-18. 

The Law of Tithes. 
30. All the tithe of the land. The 
' tithe ' of any thing is its tenth part. 



282 



LEVITICUS. 



[B. C. 149L 



32 And concerning the tithe of 
the herd, or of the flock, even of 
whatsoever u passe th under the 
rod, the tenth shall be holy unto 
the Lord. 

33 He shall not search whether 
it be good or bad, x neither shall 

u See Jer. 33. 13. Ezek. 20. 37. Mic. 7. 
14. X ver. 10. 

Of the yearly products of the land of 
the Israelites, the first-fruits were first 
deducted ; out of the rest the tenth part 
was taken for the Levites, Num. 18. 21 ; 
of the nine remaining parts, another 
tenth part was to be taken and brought 
to Jerusalem, and there eaten by the 
owners, Deut. 12. 6 ; though this second 
tithe was every third year distributed 
to the poor, Deut. 28. 29. 

32. Of whatsoever passeth under the 
rod. This is thus explained by the 
Rabbinical writers : ' When a man was 
to give the tithe of his sheep or calves 
to God, he was to shut up the whole 
flock in one fold, in which there was 
one narrow door capable of letting out 
one at a time. The owner about to 
give the tenth to the Lord stood by the 
door with a rod in his hand, the end of 
which was dipped in vermillion or red 
ochre. The mothers of these lambs or 



he change it: and if he change it 
at all, then both it and the change 
thereof shall be holy ; it shall not 
be redeemed. 

34 y These are the command- 
ments which the Lord commanded 
Moses for the children of Israel in 
mount Sinai. 

y ch. 26. 46. 

calves stood without ; the door being 
opened, the young ones ran out to join 
themselves to their dams ; and as they 
passed out, the owner stood with his 
rod over them, and counted 1, 2, 3, &c., 
and when the tenth came, he touched it 
with the colored rod, by which it was 
distinguished to be the tithe calf, sheep, 
&c., and whether poor or lean, perfect 
or blemished, that was received as the 
legitimate tithe .^ It is probably in 
reference to this custom that the pro- 
phet speaking to Israel says, Ezek. 20. 
37, ' I will cause you to pass under the 
rod, and will bring you into the word 
of the covenant ;' i. e. you shall be once 
more claimed as the Lord's property, 
and be in all things devoted to his ser- 
vice, being marked or ascertained by 
special providences and manifestations 
of his kindness to be his peculiar people. 



& 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper proces; 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: June 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATIO 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



/ 



T?^ 




